Whitman V. America Trucking Associations, Inc Essay

Whitman V. America hauling Associations, Inc - Essay ExampleIn a review conducted by EPA, it revealed that public health shag be improved by lowering emission standards for ozone and particulates. The fine particles found in melody pollution can cause premature death and chronic bronchitis. On the other hand, ozone can cause lung inflammation and elongated exposure may cause permanent damage to the lungs. Both pollutants atomic number 18 considered as health hazards since they are closely associated with increased hospital admissions and can cause respiratory problems like asthma and respiratory piece of land infection. EPA lowered the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) which was challenged by industry groups for failure to name the cost of compliance. The Court of Appeals rule in favor of the industry groups. Hence, appeal was made by EPA. The irresponsible Court ruled in favor of the constitutionality of EPAs delegated business leader to set bailiwick expressi on fictional character standards for the valueion of the public from harmful effects of air pollution, without considering the economic costs of implementing the standards. The quality standards set forrader by EPA is imbued with public interest for the protection of the nations health and safety. The High Court ruled that there was no violation of the non-delegated doctrine and EPA acted within the bounds of the delegated power. The key issue in this role is whether or not the (EPA) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) has the delegated legislative power to decree new regulations and set national air quality standards for the protection of the public from harmful effects of air pollution. Under branch 109(b)(1) of the CAA (Clean Air Act) enacted by Congress, it empowered the EPA to set ambient air quality standards and give out regulations for identified air pollutants.When the EPA reviewed this information after five years, the EPA issued an amendment to the Act in Section 109(b)(1), requiring the EPA to set air quality standards necessary for the protection of public health the attainment and maintenance of which are request to protect the public health with an adequate margin of safety. Plaintiff American Trucking Associations, Inc. brought suit in the zone Court for the District of Columbia and argued that the amendment is unconstitutional while at the same time questioned the delegated legislative power to the EPA. The territory court held that the CAA did not provide any intelligible principles to the EPA for enacting new regulations, and suggested that the EPA could avoid unconstitutionality by adopting a more restrictive version of Sec. 109(b)(1). The Court of Appeals (D.C. Circuit Court) ruled otherwise by stating that the standard do procedure delegated by Congress to the EPA to set air quality was an unconstitutional and runs counter with Article I, Section I of the U.S. Constitution because it found that the EPA had construed th e statute to afford no intelligible principle to direct the solve of authority of the agency. EPA misinterpreted the statute believing that the agency can exercise of authority and implement a national ambient air quality standard. The district court remanded the regulation to the EPA for review, and the agency appealed. The Court of Appeals agreed with the district court, thus, prompting Whitman and the EPA appealed to the US Supreme Court. The ruling of the Supreme Court found that degree of agency circumspection that is acceptable varies according to the scope of the power conferred to it by the legislature. Administrative agencies, like EPA, are not granted full discretion and blanket authority when faced with all-encompassing regulatory