Washington Gov. Jay Inslee gets into an SUV after speaking March 6 on a nonpartisan panel discussion titled “Foreign Affairs and National Security in the Age of Climate Change” hosted by the University of Washington Jackson School and the American Security Project on the UW campus in Seattle. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren, file)

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee gets into an SUV after speaking March 6 on a nonpartisan panel discussion titled “Foreign Affairs and National Security in the Age of Climate Change” hosted by the University of Washington Jackson School and the American Security Project on the UW campus in Seattle. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren, file)

Showdown on Inslee’s clean air rule reaches Supreme Court

Justices will consider whether Inslee had authority to impose regulations. A lower court said no.

OLYMPIA — In 2015, after another session without procuring a key weapon in his climate change fighting strategy, Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee decided to get it done on his own.

He had pledged to combat a looming environmental cataclysm and was tired of lawmakers thwarting attempts to engage in the battle in a meaningful way.

Tapping into his executive powers, Inslee directed the state Department of Ecology to design a means of capping and, over time, reducing emissions of pollution-abetting carbon.

A sweeping rewrite of the state’s clean air rules emerged. A legal challenge from a few of those in the crosshairs of the new regulations ensued. And in December 2017 a Thurston County judge found the gubernator’s decree went too far and blocked the rule from taking effect.

On March 19, the content of the rule and the breadth of Inslee’s executive authority will be considered by the state Supreme Court.

Ironically, such flexing of executive muscle on behalf of one’s political agenda is what we’ve come to expect from President Donald Trump, the man whose job Inslee is seeking. It’s been Trump’s go-to exercise when stymied by Congress from keeping his political promises.

Trump has pretty much lost every courtroom encounter. It’ll be a few months before the fate of Inslee’s endeavor is known.

The rule crafted by the governor’s ecology agency set emission standards for both stationary sources of pollutants and purveyors of fossil fuels that emit greenhouse gases when burned.

It targeted the state’s largest emitters such as natural gas distributors, petroleum product producers and importers, power plants, metal manufacturers and landfill operators. Large manufacturing operations, such as the Boeing Co. plant in Everett, also made the list of those expected to be affected at some point.

Inslee wanted to require each of the 68 outfits on the list to reduce carbon emissions by an average of 1.7 percent annually. Initially, the rule would apply to those that release at least 100,000 metric tons of carbon a year. Every three years the threshold would drop and as a result more companies would be subject to the requirements.

In the legal challenge, natural gas providers argue the rule should not apply to them as they do not generate emissions which they can reduce. The Association of Washington Business contends the approach is a flat-out overreach from the executive branch.

AWB lawyers argue in their brief that Inslee had become “fed up” with the Legislature when it didn’t act in 2015 and ordered the agency to come up with the rule.

“As Ecology conceded in an internal memorandum: ‘Alternatives were not considered because the Department of Ecology was directed by Governor Inslee to develop and adopt a rule,’” they wrote.

State attorneys counter the department has “broad authority” to set emission standards and the rule “should be upheld in its entirety.”

But each provision can be dealt with separately, they contend. If one is found invalid, the rest “can remain in place and perform the important task of reducing Washington State’s greenhouse gas emissions,” they wrote.

The Supreme Court hearing comes as Democratic lawmakers are on course to enact several bills — such as a low-carbon fuel standard and providing electricity from non fossil fuel sources — which are projected to reduce carbon emissions on a par with what the Clean Air Rule originally sought to accomplish.

Inslee still wants the rule. If restored by the court, it would further embolden the governor and presidential candidate on his self-proclaimed mission to save the world for future generations from the devastation of climate change.

“I filed an executive order that I believe is totally within my executive authority to do,” Inslee told a crowd of mostly students at a University of Washington forum earlier this month. “ There’s some dispute about that and the Supreme Court is going to decide. I hope they decide it in favor of all of our grandchildren.”

Jerry Cornfield: 360-352-8623; jcornfield@herald net.com. Twitter: @dospueblos.

More in News & Comment

Sole survivor: Edmonds man goes 21 days on “Naked and Afraid”

Max Djenohan did a 14-day challenge in reality TV jungle last year. He went back for another round.

United Methodist vote has churches’ future in question

Congregations debate separation following gay-clergy, same-sex marriage ban.

Gov. Jay Inlsee signs into law the Native American Voting Rights Act, which allows a non-traditional address to be used for voter registration for residents who live on reservations. Photo by Emma Epperly/WNPA Olympia News Bureau
Native American Voting Rights Act signed into law

Non-traditional addresses can be used for voter registration on tribal lands

Showdown on Inslee’s clean air rule reaches Supreme Court

Justices will consider whether Inslee had authority to impose regulations. A lower court said no.

U.S. is now grounding Renton-made 737 MAX 8 and 9; Boeing supports decision

Update: The decision does not affect Renton production lines.

Deputy has disease she never heard of — now she needs help

A bone marrow transplant could save 27-year-old Molly Thunder of Snohomish County

Suspect in vicious Marysville hatchet attack arrested

The victim suffered four skull fractures. The suspect was found with another hatchet in Everett.

The U.S. Coast Guard’s Polar Star, a heavy icebreaker, during its 105-day deployment to Antarctica. The icebreaker returned to its homeport of Seattle on Monday. (Photo Courtesy U.S. Coast Guard)
Icebreaker is home from Antarctica, and ex-Coastie reflects

An Everett man served aboard the Staten Island. The Polar Star now is one of just two U.S. icebreakers.

Courtesy photo
State lawmakers seek permanent daylight saving time in Washington

Senate and House are working toward compromise on two bills; voters could decide in November election

Most Read