Georgetown University Law Center (GULC) community members filed an amicus curiae brief,  which allows experts not involved in the case to provide information to the court, on an environment-related Supreme Court case.

The Supreme Court will decide in the case West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) whether Congress can authorize the EPA to issue significant rules without limits on what the agency can require. The case will determine if the EPA has the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions as long as it considers cost, non-air impacts and energy requirements.  

Sara Colangelo (LAW ’07), director of GULC’s Environmental Law and Justice Clinic and a visiting professor at GULC, and Jack Whiteley, supervising attorney and teaching fellow at the clinic, wrote the brief, which conveyed that the EPA’s authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants is critical to mitigate the scale of health effects of climate pollutants. 

The case’s oral arguments, which were heard Feb. 28, consisted of discussions about how much authority Congress should have in the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions by power plants, which constitute almost 33% of domestic greenhouse gas emissions.  

The brief included public health data to provide scientific background on the harmful effects of climate change, according to Colangelo.

“This brief was intended to represent the collective wisdom of the nation’s leading medical professionals on the public health effects from climate change,” Colangelo wrote in an email to The Hoya. “Our goal was to educate the Court on the practical consequences of its decision using unassailable scientific information.”

The signatories on the clinic’s brief are concerned about the limitations this case could bring on the EPA’s regulatory abilities, according to Whiteley.

“The petitioners’ arguments are intended to make it more difficult for the EPA to regulate carbon emissions in the future,” Whiteley wrote. “The amici on our brief are alarmed by this prospect.”

By explaining data regarding heat-related illnesses, fire season lengths and degraded water quality, the brief shows how these factors contribute to declining public health in the United States.  

The brief noted the important connection between health and climate change in the case, according to Lisa Heinzerling, a professor at GULC who teaches classes in environmental law and advocacy.

“The Environmental Law and Justice clinic’s amicus brief reminded us all of what will be at stake, in terms of human life and health, when the justices retire to their chambers to consider EPA’s authority to address climate change under the Clean Air Act,” Heinzerling wrote in an email to The Hoya.

This brief highlighted the importance of the impact of EPA’s regulatory role on the climate, according to Colangelo.

“We also wanted to convey that the EPA’s authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants is critical to mitigate the scale of health effects of climate pollutants,” Colangelo wrote. “We urged the Court to be mindful of Congress’s decision to provide EPA regulatory authority to address this type of threat to public health.”

The Environmental Law and Justice Clinic became involved in writing the brief as a result of the influence of the American Thoracic Society (ATS), an organization that advances respiratory health through research, education and advocacy. The ATS garnered support from 16 other medical organizations and 40 public health schools, all of whom signed onto the clinic’s brief, according to Colangelo.

Despite the brief, the court will hear the merits of the case and make a decision that will influence the EPA, according to Colangelo.

The clinic’s work represents GULC’s involvement in  Supreme Court decisions, according to William Treanor, dean of GULC.

“Because of our proximity both to the Supreme Court and to the many national organizations that have interests in the Court’s litigation, our law school is a significant voice in the Supreme Court on a wide range of issues,” Treanor wrote in an email to The Hoya.

Treanor said he is supportive of the clinic’s work on environmental issues.

“I am incredibly proud of the important work the clinic did in this case, and of the role that Georgetown plays in advocating on critical issues like climate change,” Treanor wrote.