Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios

Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death and the battle over her vacant Supreme Court seat have real implications for energy and climate policy.

Why it matters: If President Trump replaces her, the court will likely become more skeptical of regulations that claim expansive federal power to regulate carbon under existing law, and perhaps new climate statutes as well.

  • If Joe Biden wins the election, that expanded conservative majority on the court could create more legal jeopardy for his promised initiatives to strengthen emissions regulations and create new major ones.
  • "[A] Biden Administration could find it harder to demonstrate that it had a 'reasoned explanation' for rewriting final, Trump-era rules," ClearView Energy Partners said in a weekend note.
  • If Trump wins again, it could strengthen his hand in defending his moves to scrap or weaken Obama-era policies.

The big picture: SCOTUS already blessed federal regulation of greenhouses gases in a 2007 decision, but how much running room it gives agencies is another question entirely. A huge thing in regulatory litigation is how justices interpret the 1984 high court ruling in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council. It gives agencies leeway to interpret statutes that are vague or silent on a topic.

What they're saying: "Already, the Court has been taking a narrower view of Chevron — finding that it applies in fewer and fewer instances, so the principle of deference to agency expertise seems to apply to a smaller scope of cases," said Harvard Law professor Jody Freeman."So, this was already the direction, and a Biden administration was already going to have to be smart and strategic about regulation," said Freeman, who worked in Obama's first-term White House.

Yes, but: "Biden could do a lot on climate change within the EPA’s well-established authority to reduce greenhouse gases," Freeman said, adding, "There is plenty of room to make substantial progress using executive power, while controlling legal risk."

Our thought bubble: There's an even bigger potential spillover effect from the fight over the vacant seat.

  • Imagine Trump loses and Democrats also take the Senate, but the current GOP Senate majority confirms his SCOTUS pick this year.
  • If that happens, the odds grow that Democrats would scrap filibuster rules next year to make it easier to implement their agenda.
  • That, in turn, greatly increases the odds of passing big climate and energy legislation, which faces immense hurdles with the 60-vote threshold intact.

The intrigue: Per ClearView, ending the filibuster would have multiple spillover effects.

  • "[T]he legislative filibuster does not merely shelter the fossil energy status quo by raising the bar for passage."
  • "It also gives a 41-Senator minority the power to threaten a government shutdown (i.e., by blocking funding packages) as a check against Executive Branch decisions. That check would disappear."

Go deeper

Senate Dems will boycott vote to advance Judge Amy Coney Barrett

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett. Photo: Stefani Reynolds/Getty Images

Senate Democrats are expected to boycott Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett’s Thursday Judiciary Committee vote, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced on Wednesday.

The big picture: The boycott will not prevent Barrett from moving forward in the nomination process, but the largely symbolic display is a symptom of Democrats and Republicans’ clashing over President Trump’s Supreme Court pick.

Updated Oct 22, 2020 - Politics & Policy

Supreme Court blocks Alabama curbside voting measure

Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Wednesday evening blocked a lower court order that would have allowed voters to cast ballots curbside at Alabama polling places on Election Day.

Whit it matters: With less than two weeks until Election Day, the justices voted 5-3 to reinstate the curbside voting ban and overturn a lower court judge's ruling designed to protect people with disabilities during the coronavirus pandemic.

Amy Harder, author of Generate
5 hours ago - Energy & Environment

Climate change goes mainstream in presidential debate

Photo illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios. Photo: Olivier Douliery-Pool/Getty

The most notable part of Thursday’s presidential debate on climate change was the fact it was included as a topic and assumed as a fact.

The big picture: This is the first time in U.S. presidential history that climate change was a featured issue at a debate. It signals how the problem has become part of the fabric of our society. More extreme weather, like the wildfires ravaging Colorado, is pushing the topic to the front-burner.