October Term 2000 · Docket 99-1257
Can the EPA revise ozone standards despite congressional limits?
Ohio and trucking groups claim the EPA broke the law by changing ozone rules. The EPA argues Congress gave it this power.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
General Waxman argued the Clean Air Act does not violate the nondelegation doctrine.
Ms. French argued the EPA's action conflicted with Congress' specific plan.
Mr. Warren argued the EPA's decision lacked a clear decision-making framework.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 39-37 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 39-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 47, lines 29-31 — Transcript, file page 47, lines 29-31
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the EPA's authority to update air quality rules. The dispute centers on whether Congress restricted the agency's power to change ozone standards.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 39-37 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 39-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 25-27
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 7, 2000.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
What each side wants
Ohio and trucking groups want the court to strike down the new ozone standard.
The EPA wants the court to keep the revised ozone standard in place.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 39-37 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 39-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 25-27
What each side says
Ohio argues the EPA acted unlawfully because the 1990 law limits its power.
The EPA argues the Clean Air Act grants it broad authority to set these standards.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 39-37 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 39-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 25-27
What the justices asked
Did Congress intend to limit the EPA's ability to revise ozone standards?
Does the Clean Air Act violate the nondelegation doctrine?
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 47, lines 29-31 — Transcript, file page 47, lines 29-31
Why it matters
This case defines the balance of power between Congress and the EPA. It determines how much discretion the agency holds when setting environmental rules. The outcome shapes future air quality regulations nationwide.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 39-37 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 39-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 25-27
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 47, lines 29-31 — Transcript, file page 47, lines 29-31
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 39-37 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 39-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 39-37 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 39-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 25-27
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.