U.S. Supreme Court justices have agreed to review a lower court ruling that rightly recognized limits on the Environmental Protection Agency's power. High court justices should uphold the decision.
In 2010, as part of its war against the coal industry, the EPA proposed so-called new "cross-state" limits on emissions by power plants. Enforcement would have the effect of closing down many coal-fired power plants and forcing costly upgrades - paid for by consumers - at others.
But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected the EPA's plan. The lower court ruling pointed out the agency is going far beyond its statutory authority.
Meanwhile, Supreme Court justices agreed to review that ruling.
Though Congress, through the Clean Air Act, has given the EPA sweeping authority to impose draconian regulations, there are limits. The lower court recognized that.
Now, high court justices should emphasize the limits by upholding the D.C. appeals court. Clearly, the EPA needs to be reined in. If Congress will not do that, the courts should.