Center for American Progress

Supreme Court’s EPA Ruling does not doom the SEC’s climate disclosure rule
In the News

Supreme Court’s EPA Ruling does not doom the SEC’s climate disclosure rule

Todd Phillips explains why the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in West Virginia v. EPA does not doom the SEC’s forthcoming climate disclosure rule.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia vs. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to limit the agency’s authority to act on climate change, opponents of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) forthcoming climate disclosure rule have unequivocally declared that the opinion dooms it, too.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

In the recent EPA ruling, the Supreme Court held that the so-called “major questions doctrine” applies when a court determines an agency has taken on new, extensive power that vastly expands its ability to address extraordinary policy questions. According to the Supreme Court, under this doctrine, it will only strike down regulations if agencies make an “unprecedented” departure from past interpretations of legal authority or “assert highly consequential power beyond what Congress could reasonably be understood to have granted.” To that end, one scholar argued that the doctrine should instead be named the “extraordinary questions doctrine,” as agency actions can be major yet permissible.

The above excerpt was originally published in The Hill. Click here to view the full article.

The positions of American Progress, and our policy experts, are independent, and the findings and conclusions presented are those of American Progress alone. A full list of supporters is available here. American Progress would like to acknowledge the many generous supporters who make our work possible.


Todd Phillips

Former Director, Financial Regulation and Corporate Governance

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.