STREAMING NOW: Watch Now

Pruitt praised Scalia, but his actions sing a different tune

Someday, maybe soon, a new administrator will assume the reins at the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The c...

Posted: May 16, 2018 8:15 AM
Updated: May 16, 2018 8:15 AM

Someday, maybe soon, a new administrator will assume the reins at the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The current administrator, Scott Pruitt, remains embattled after an avalanche of ethical, fiscal, and managerial lapses, plus reported intolerance for dissent.

Amid all the noise, a crucial question must be addressed: How has Pruitt done at his job, and what should the EPA's future head -- or Pruitt himself, if he remains -- learn from his track record? Somewhat paradoxically, the late Justice Antonin Scalia's writings provide illumination. Pruitt has professed admiration for Scalia, a conservative, describing him as a stalwart defender of the law and constitutional fundamentals.

But it is exactly Scalia's emphasis on fealty to the law that highlights Pruitt's failure at his post thus far. Pruitt has demonstrated an unwavering disrespect for the requirements of statutes and judicial precedents. Any leader of the EPA, present or future, should heed Scalia's lessons about rule-of-law fundamentals.

The EPA's role is shaped by law, not partisan politics

Justice Scalia forever emphasized that courts and agencies need to respect congressional choices reflected in the laws.

Pruitt has acted as if he could write on a blank slate, seeking regulatory reversals before doing the congressionally required work to justify them. Every statute sets out goals, procedures, and criteria to guide agency actions. Wholesale regulatory reversals tend to be hard, especially where the law is protective and science is sound.

Yet Pruitt's EPA has repeatedly dodged engagement with the law's substantive and procedural requirements and ignored or sought to skew the science, erring instead on the side of polluters seeking relief.

The EPA's determination in April that it would roll back car efficiency regulations -- a move cheered by the auto industry -- is a case in point. The agency originally set these regulations in 2012 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve mileage. That action followed a 2007 Supreme Court decision ordering the EPA to follow the law in assessing the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles.

The EPA's recent determination under Pruitt, however, was flatly contrary to determinations published by the EPA in January 2017, just before President Donald Trump took office. Barack Obama's EPA had massively documented technology, business, and consumer trends and concluded that progress in motor vehicle efficiency and reducing emissions was exceeding earlier expectations.

Pruitt's EPA has reversed that conclusion, determining to discard these mileage and emission requirements. What the agency will require in the future is not clear and it has thus far provided scant justification for the decision. It merely paraphrased industry concerns, without the EPA stating its own conclusions about the state of technological progress. This rollback has already provoked litigation and congressional criticism.

The EPA administrator must abide by legal rules of the road

In a democracy ruled by law, agencies must do things the right way, even if clunky or slow.

Scalia called for compliance with such procedural requirements, emphasizing in a 1978 article that "one of the functions of procedure is to limit power -- not just the power to be unfair, but the power to act in a political mode, or the power to act at all."

Indeed, during times of deregulatory rollbacks, the Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that an agency making a policy change must surmount several hurdles: The original regulations stand until validly changed. Moreover, the agency must provide "good reasons" for a change, leave no "unexplained inconsistency," and grapple with underlying facts and the effects of the original policy.

Pruitt's EPA, however, has sought to scuttle still-governing regulations with shortcuts, such as claimed delays or postponements that would, in reality, indefinitely shelve earlier finalized regulations, but without providing the analysis and justification the Supreme Court has long required. So far, the EPA has repeatedly lost on this strategy in the courts.

In 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, the nation's pre-eminent federal appellate court, ruled that the EPA could not roll back methane regulations through a regulatory stay without new rule-making that included opportunities for public comment, plus legal and factual justification.

And, similarly, a federal district court in California in 2018 rejected the EPA's use of a delay strategy to indirectly abandon pesticide regulation.

The EPA's administrator must faithfully execute laws that protect the environment

The EPA's head is constitutionally obligated to uphold these laws, not to benefit or bail out some particular sector or region. Two of Scalia's most significant opinions involved the EPA's authority to focus on health, or costs, or perhaps both.

Scalia's instructions? Follow the law.

In one case, the law's text mandated that the agency make regulatory choices based on an assessment of a pollutant's threats to health, and Scalia's opinion for the court said just that.

In the other, Scalia -- and a strong court majority -- said the EPA and other agencies must look at both the benefits of regulation as well as regulatory costs, unless prohibited by law. Scalia castigated agencies for illegal "interpretive gerrymanders," stating that they cannot keep portions of the law they favor and discard the rest. Under Pruitt's leadership, the EPA has done exactly what Scalia condemned.

Statutes rule the day, and balanced analysis is the norm. Pruitt seems to have forgotten this, and has been focusing inordinately on polluters' concerns, while barely addressing resulting harms from increased pollution that, again and again, he wanted to allow.

Neither Pruitt nor any future EPA administrator is above the law.

The EPA administrator must acknowledge his or her own limitations

Environmental law is laden with science, technological issues, and evidence-based assessments of the best performers and cutting-edge developments. A good administrator will listen to self-interested lawyers and lobbyists, but then seek expert agency counsel and follow the law and evidence. Pruitt has met extensively with his anti-environmental allies, but few others.

It makes sense, then, that under Pruitt, the agency has proposed poorly justified rollbacks. Short-circuiting procedures designed to allow for public comment and constrain government power (as Justice Scalia noted) has left Pruitt's EPA with the appearance of being one-sided and ill-informed.

Public servants must respect the law. The EPA has gone through hard times before, but Pruitt's reign has been a uniquely lawless disaster. If a new administrator respects the law and follows the science and data, that administrator may still find room to adjust agency policy, yet emerge with reputation and the environment intact.

Mississippi Coronavirus Cases

Data is updated nightly.

Confirmed Cases: 27900

Reported Deaths: 1082
CountyConfirmedDeaths
Hinds215239
DeSoto137316
Madison122234
Jones106949
Neshoba96069
Lauderdale88278
Rankin84112
Forrest81442
Scott75015
Harrison7448
Copiah56615
Leake54819
Jackson53316
Holmes52741
Wayne52112
Washington4969
Lee49316
Oktibbeha48624
Yazoo4736
Leflore47249
Lowndes45311
Warren44317
Lincoln43534
Lamar4197
Grenada3805
Monroe36729
Pike36712
Attala35223
Lafayette3524
Newton3289
Sunflower3066
Covington3025
Bolivar27713
Panola2706
Adams26718
Chickasaw25918
Tate2577
Jasper2506
Marion24811
Pontotoc2476
Noxubee2458
Pearl River24432
Winston2435
Clay24210
Claiborne23610
Simpson2303
Smith20611
Clarke20124
Marshall2013
Coahoma1866
Kemper17614
Union1759
Walthall1724
Yalobusha1617
Carroll16011
Lawrence1591
Itawamba1278
Calhoun1244
Humphreys1239
Tippah12311
Webster12310
Montgomery1222
Hancock12013
Jefferson Davis1064
Tallahatchie1043
Prentiss983
Greene927
Jefferson923
Wilkinson919
Tunica893
Amite822
George743
Choctaw714
Quitman680
Tishomingo681
Perry614
Alcorn561
Stone521
Franklin382
Benton270
Sharkey240
Issaquena71
Unassigned00

Alabama Coronavirus Cases

Confirmed Cases: 38442

Reported Deaths: 947
CountyConfirmedDeaths
Jefferson4387142
Montgomery383999
Mobile3697134
Tuscaloosa204938
Marshall153710
Lee118937
Shelby108223
Madison10577
Morgan9813
Walker86723
Franklin85213
Dallas8198
Elmore81314
Baldwin6869
Etowah62513
Butler60427
DeKalb6025
Chambers58127
Tallapoosa56369
Autauga54511
Unassigned52025
Russell4840
Lowndes45820
Lauderdale4446
Houston4344
Limestone4090
Cullman4003
Pike3995
Colbert3685
Bullock3629
Coffee3532
Barbour3231
Covington3087
St. Clair3042
Hale29321
Marengo28611
Wilcox2808
Sumter27612
Calhoun2705
Talladega2677
Clarke2665
Escambia2636
Dale2440
Jackson2382
Winston2333
Blount2141
Chilton2112
Pickens2116
Marion20312
Monroe1972
Choctaw19212
Conecuh1804
Bibb1711
Macon1708
Randolph1709
Greene1667
Perry1451
Henry1303
Crenshaw1233
Lawrence1010
Washington1007
Cherokee747
Lamar711
Fayette671
Geneva670
Clay582
Coosa551
Cleburne291
Out of AL00
Tupelo
Overcast
73° wxIcon
Hi: 89° Lo: 73°
Feels Like: 73°
Columbus
Scattered Clouds
72° wxIcon
Hi: 90° Lo: 73°
Feels Like: 72°
Oxford
Few Clouds
72° wxIcon
Hi: 88° Lo: 72°
Feels Like: 72°
Starkville
Scattered Clouds
70° wxIcon
Hi: 87° Lo: 70°
Feels Like: 70°
WTVA Radar
WTVA Temperatures
WTVA Severe Weather