Overview:
- The U.S. Supreme Court's temporary block on an EPA rule hints at a shift in climate policy, with Justice Barrett's role expanding.
- This decision impacts Metro Detroit, where air pollution and industrial activity are pressing issues.
- The Court's move to let the EPA's regulation on coal plant emissions stand temporarily suggests a potential change in judicial approach. - Local advocacy and state efforts are crucial for safeguarding Michigan's environment.
In a recent ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court made headlines by opting not to temporarily block an Environmental Protection Agency air quality rule—an action analysts suggest reflects a shift in the Court’s climate stance.
Observers point to Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s growing influence in shaping the Court’s decisions on environmental matters, signaling a potential departure from its previously aggressive posture on limiting federal regulatory power.
The Supreme Court has played a central role in determining the scope of federal agencies like the EPA to regulate pollution and enforce environmental protections.
Earlier this year, the justices blocked the so-called “good neighbor plan” that would have reduced the amount of air pollution crossing state lines.
However, this week’s decision to let an EPA air quality regulation targeting emissions from coal-fired power plants rule stand, albeit temporarily, is being interpreted as a sign that the Court may be recalibrating its approach. The Court also let two methane and mercury pollution regulations stand earlier this month.
The Supreme Court’s decisions significantly affect Metro Detroit as communities grapple with environmental and health challenges tied to air and water pollution.
What this means for Metro Detroit’s air pollution, climate
For communities across Metro Detroit, the Supreme Court’s evolving stance on environmental regulation is more than just a legal matter—it has real consequences for health and quality of life.
As Planet Detroit has reported extensively, neighborhoods—especially on the East side and in Southwest Detroit—are already suffering from high levels of air pollution, mainly due to industrial activity and lax regulatory enforcement.
We’ve highlighted how pollution from DTE Energy’s facilities and other industrial sites disproportionately impacts low-income and Black and brown communities, contributing to health issues like asthma and heart disease.
With this new EPA rule allowed to move forward, there’s a glimmer of hope that federal oversight could help mitigate some of these problems by imposing stricter limits on harmful emissions. Yet, uncertainty remains.
For Detroit, a city already dealing with entrenched environmental and public health inequities, federal regulations are a critical safeguard—one that could be weakened by Supreme Court intervention.
Implications for particulate matter regulation
In February, the EPA finalized a new regulation strengthening the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for PM2.5, fine particulate matter, or soot. The updated standard lowers the allowable annual concentration of PM2.5 from 12.0 micrograms per cubic meter to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter.
This change reflects growing evidence about the health risks of long-term exposure to fine particulate pollution, including asthma, heart disease, and premature death. The American Lung Association gives Wayne County an “F” for particulate pollution.
The new rule is expected to yield significant public health benefits, including the prevention of 4,500 premature deaths annually and the reduction of 800,000 people’s asthma-related symptoms.
However, the more stringent standards will pose challenges for regions with high pollution levels, particularly those with a strong industrial presence like Metro Detroit, which already struggles with air quality due to emissions from coal plants, vehicle traffic and manufacturing.
Detroit and Southeast Michigan are currently attaining the previous PM2.5 standard of 12 micrograms per cubic meter. However, it remains to be seen how the region will fare under the new, stricter standard. States are required to submit recommendations for areas in non-compliance (nonattainment) by February 2025, and the EPA will make final designations in 2026.
Currently, several lawsuits are challenging the EPA’s new PM2.5 regulation, primarily led by industry groups such as the National Association of Manufacturers and 25 Republican-led states.
These groups argue that the rule imposes unrealistic and burdensome requirements that could harm economic growth, especially in industries like manufacturing and agriculture. Some also claim that Congress unlawfully delegated too much authority to the EPA in setting such standards and that the agency failed to consider the economic costs of compliance adequately.
As these cases go through the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, there is speculation that the Supreme Court may eventually weigh in.
Local advocacy and state regulation remain crucial
Local and state-level advocacy will be increasingly important in protecting Michigan’s air and water without consistent federal action.
For example, this year, the Michigan Environmental Council has prioritized restoring EGLE’s rulemaking authority under Part 31 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA).
This policy would help address failing septic systems and improve water quality by allowing the state to update outdated regulations, set nutrient standards to prevent harmful algal blooms, and better protect public health.
The battle for cleaner air and environmental justice for Metro Detroit could hinge on how effectively local advocates push to enforce existing regulations.