Parts Per Billion

Justices Give EPA Glimmer of Hope in Climate Case

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in West Virginia v. EPA on Monday, a case that could result in the narrowing of the agency's authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.But, to some surprise, a few of the court's conservative justices posed tough questions to the attorney arguing against the EPA, which may indicate they're open to siding with the agency in this case.On today's episode of Parts Per Billion, our weekly environmental podcast, we're joined by Bloomberg Law's Jennifer Hijazi to break down what happened at the high court on Monday. Jennifer explains why, even if the court doesn't end up siding with the EPA, the agency has likely avoided the potential worst-case scenario some had feared going into the argument. Do you have feedback on this episode of Parts Per Billion? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690. Learn more about your ad-choices at <a href="https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com">https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com</a>See <a href="https://omnystudio.com/listener">omnystudio.com/listener</a> for privacy information.

Parts Per Billion is Bloomberg Law's environmental policy podcast. We cover everything from air pollution, to toxic chemicals, to corporate sustainability, and climate change. The reporters from our environment desk offer an inside look at what's happening at Congress, in the courts, and at the federal agencies, and help explain the scientific and policy debates shaping environmental laws and regulations. Host: David Schultz