Court disregards the Clean Air Act’s clear language in applying the major questions doctrine to curb EPA’s climate authority.
We need to extend and expand an overdue conversation about clarity in the U.S. legal system.
The law needs not only to correct information asymmetries but comprehension asymmetries too.
A real EPA transparency rule should be grounded in scientific practices, not constituency interests.
Proposed limits to EPA’s consideration of scientific data threaten timely, sound policymaking.