California v. EPA

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denied petitions for review challenging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) adoption of regulations that aligned emissions standards for domestic aircraft with “technology-following” standards promulgated by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) rather than establish “technology-forcing” standards. As a threshold matter, the court determined that it had jurisdiction because at least one of the state petitioners—Massachusetts—had standing under Supreme Court precedent in the nearly factually identical Massachusetts v. EPA. On the merits, the D.C. Circuit first held that the applicable Clean Air Act provision did not mandate a technology-forcing approach and that the EPA regulation permissibly implemented the provision by aligning domestic regulations with ICAO standards. Second, the D.C. Circuit rejected the petitioners’ arguments that the regulation was arbitrary and capricious. The petitioners contended that EPA failed to account for climate change harms, failed to consider alternatives that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and failed to sufficiently consider impacts on minority and low-income populations and on federalism interests as required by two executive orders. The court found that EPA reasonably determined that the best way to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions was to align domestic standards with international standards and that, given this conclusion, it was not necessary for EPA “to exhaustively examine alternatives that departed from these standards.” The court also found that the two executive orders, which provided no right to judicial review, foreclosed the argument that EPA acted arbitrarily and capriciously by failing to comply with them.