(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden’s first State of the Union address will be a remarkable scene: A maskless president speaking to more than 500 invited lawmakers packed cheek-to-jowl in the historic House chamber, also allowed to go without masks so long as they got tested first.
Case numbers and hospitalization levels have plummeted. Three-fourths of U.S. adults are now fully vaccinated with a growing number of people getting boosted. Rapid tests are finally widely available. And life-saving therapeutics including new anti-viral pills are growing in supply.
With such optimism on public display, Biden’s address will signal a new phase in the pandemic. It also will be a tacit acknowledgement that the virus, at any moment, could come roaring back to life.
Officials told ABC News that Biden on Tuesday would shy away from any suggestion of “mission accomplished” or even that the virus had morphed into an “endemic” state — a term reserved to describe a virus that persists but is mostly predictable.
Instead, a White House official described the president’s speech as noting the nation is now able to “move forward safely in a way in which COVID no longer disrupts our lives the way it has previously.”
The president also will “emphasize the need for the U.S. to remain vigilant in the face of an unpredictable virus, including by preparing for future variants,” said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity in order to discuss details in advance of the speech.
That the nation is “moving forward safely” probably isn’t the bumper sticker slogan Democrats were hoping for in a midterm election year. But it’s also a much more honest assessment of a virus that’s still widely circulating globally and which has killed at least 945,688 Americans despite aggressive efforts to contain its spread.
Biden’s speech will be in juxtaposition to last year’s Fourth of July speech in which he declared the nation was close to its “independence” from the virus. But pockets of the country refused to get vaccinated last summer, giving rise to fresh waves of COVID hospitalizations in the fall and winter, eventually shuttering classrooms and workplaces.
Accordingly, the White House has been revising its COVID strategy and meeting privately with some of the nation’s top pandemic experts to consider paths the virus might take. Instead of counting primarily on getting more Americans vaccinated and moving past the virus, Biden’s new strategy would acknowledge that Americans might experience COVID in waves in the year to come and that the federal government’s role would be to blunt its impact by shoring up supplies of booster shots, rapid tests and effective therapeutics.
Details of that strategy were expected as early as this week. Biden was expected to touch on that new strategy only broadly Tuesday night.
Also, last Friday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced new guidance for masks that factors in hospitalization capacity as much as it looks at new COVID case numbers and new COVID hospitalizations. The result is that based on current data more than 70% of Americans forgo masking indoors, including in schools, according to CDC guidance.
As if to remind the public of COVID’s reach, just hours before Biden’s speech Tuesday night, three Democrats — Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, Alex Padilla of California and Suzan DelBene of Washington — announced they had tested positive. Several Republicans said they wouldn’t attend because they objected to having to take the PCR tests in the first place.
“We’ve seen things come down before only to be surprised,” one person said, describing the meetings as helping the administration to prepare for next steps.
ABC News reporter Mariam Khan contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — The nation and the world will be watching tonight when President Joe Biden delivers his first State of the Union address at 9 p.m. ET with a main focus expected to be on how he and the U.S. are responding to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
As he is set to speak, Russian strikes are killing civilians, forces are massing near Ukraine’s capital Kyiv and Russian President Vladimir Putin shows no sign of backing down.
Biden is expected to highlight his leadership in the allied response and call on Americans to deal with higher gasoline prices in order to help defend democracy.
On the domestic front, he will also address the inflation that is driving his job approval rating at just 37% and highlight progress in dealing with the pandemic that allows many mask mandates to be dropped, including, symbolically, in the House chamber as he makes his high-profile speech.
Latest headlines:
Biden to stress leadership on Ukraine
Here is how the news is developing today. All times Eastern. Check back for updates.
Mar 01, 3:14 pm
Biden to stress leadership on Ukraine
President Joe Biden’s 9 p.m. ET speech, to be carried live on national television and seen around the world, will be delivered just days after Russia invaded Ukraine — and days after he nominated the first Black woman to sit on the Supreme Court.
But he’ll also be speaking to Americans suffering from historic inflation as the nation continues to emerge from the coronavirus pandemic.
With his job approval at an all-time low of 37%, Biden faces the difficult task of balancing their pain with his desire to reap the political benefits of his legislative wins so far — a massive COVID relief package and a once-in-a-generation investment in the nation’s infrastructure — while also demonstrating his leadership on one of the greatest threats to European stability since World War II.
(WASHINGTON) — It was one of the most consequential weeks of President Joe Biden’s presidency, and it came right before his first State of the Union address to Congress.
Biden’s 9 p.m. ET speech, to be carried live on national television and seen around the world, will be delivered just days after Russia invaded Ukraine — and days after he nominated the first Black woman to sit on the Supreme Court.
But he’ll also be speaking to Americans suffering from historic inflation as the nation continues to emerge from the coronavirus pandemic.
With his job approval at an all-time low of 37%, Biden faces the difficult task of balancing their pain with his desire to reap the political benefits of his legislative wins so far — a massive COVID relief package and a once-in-a-generation investment in the nation’s infrastructure — while also demonstrating his leadership on one of the greatest threats to European stability since World War II.
Defending democracy in Ukraine
While a president’s annual address to Congress typically ticks through a laundry list of domestic priorities and accomplishments, the war in Ukraine will likely compel Biden to make foreign policy a dominant theme.
“There’s no question that this speech is a little different than it would have been just a few months ago,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters Monday.
It’s a theme that Biden could use to his advantage, demonstrating his taking command as he keeps Western leaders united against a common foreign foe most Americans can recognize: Russian President Vladimir Putin.
In addition to making the crisis something of personal test of wills between himself and Putin, Biden has not shied from presenting the conflict in consequential, historical terms, equating Ukraine’s defense to the fight against autocracy; he often describes the world as facing an “inflection point” during which it’s the United States’ responsibility to show that democracy can still work.
The president has made reaffirming America’s traditional relationships and strengthening international institutions like NATO a hallmark of his first 13 months in office.
Russia’s invasion has strengthened the NATO alliance, as Western nations stand together against Russia.
Biden has made working in lockstep with Europe an overarching principle of his approach, and it’s delivered results: unprecedented, punitive sanctions against Russia; preemptive releases of intelligence information; and at home, some praise from Republicans usually critical of his policies.
After struggling with the chaotic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan and bringing Iran back to the agreement over its nuclear program, Russia’s invasion presents Biden with the ability to fulfill a campaign promise of returning America to a position of leadership in the world.
And it could lead to a few bipartisan applause lines from Republicans who have supported his approach — rather than the regular, one-sided standing ovations from Democrats.
Economic woes plague Biden’s presidency
But potentially overshadowing Ukraine and Russia in Biden’s speech will be his attempt to show how he’s addressing inflation, which is at a 40-year high, and an economy still struggling to emerge from the pandemic.
Economic discontent is hurting Biden and his party’s midterm election prospects, with six in 10 Americans reporting inflation hardships, three-quarters saying the economy’s in bad shape and a nearly 20-point lead for the Republican Party in trust to handle it, according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll.
The president planned to focus on four economic themes, the White House said: increasing domestic manufacturing and strengthening supply chains; reducing costs for families while also reducing the deficit; promoting competition as another way to lower prices; and expanding access to well paying jobs.
Biden will talk about new steps to promote competition in the ocean freight industry and improve nursing home care, the White House said.
Much of what Biden will call for, though, according to the White House, will rely on a reluctant Congress to send him legislation.
Biden fulfilled a major promise last year when he pushed a $1.9 trillion COVID relief package, known as the “American Rescue Plan,” through Congress. And the president’s $1.2 trillion infrastructure law was a major accomplishment that will pump money into roads, bridges, airports, waterways, broadband internet, cleaning up lead pipes and more.
Members of Congress, governors and other politicians of both parties have touted the benefits of the infrastructure legislation, which garnered bipartisan support.
But it will take time for many of those projects to come to fruition across the country, and Biden has faced the difficult task of using it to boost his poll numbers in the short term.
But since then, prices for food, gas and other consumer goods have jumped. While the U.S. economy has rebounded to a large degree — with strong recent job growth — wages have not kept up with inflation for most workers.
Psaki said that Biden will “absolutely” talk about inflation, noting it’s “a huge issue on the mind of Americans.”
“He’s going to make clear that one of the best ways to lower costs over the long run is to is to increase the productive capacity of our economy, to make more things in America, with more American workers contributing and earning a good living,” she said.
Meanwhile, though, the war in Ukraine has already contributed to higher energy costs — including gas prices — a political threat for Biden.
Last week, two-thirds of Americans supported imposing economic sanctions on Russia, although only 51% backed them if it meant higher energy prices in the U.S., according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll.
Biden has sought to convince Americans the price is worth it and, together with European nations, has held back from sanctioning Russia’s oil and gas sector, fearing that prices could spike around the world.
“The American people understand,” Biden said earlier this month, “that defending democracy and liberty is never without cost.”
Bringing America out of the pandemic
Before Russia invaded Ukraine, a larger theme likely would have been his stressing a “return to normalcy” to try to keep Americans tired of the pandemic from making him and Democrats pay a big political cost in November’s midterm elections.
Ahead of Biden’s speech, the White House has begun a sweeping overhaul of its COVID-19 strategy that will signal the nation is moving past crisis mode and into a more manageable phase in the pandemic, ABC News has learned.
The new strategy was expected to acknowledge that the virus is less of an urgent threat to most Americans because of widespread access to vaccines, booster shots and testing, as well as increasing availability of therapeutics.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention eased masking recommendations for most of the country last week, a major shift in the nation’s return to normalcy.
Face coverings will not be required in the House chamber where Biden will speak, a symbolic switch after the president walked in with one on for his address last year.
But the federal guidance came after governors of several liberal-leaning states moved ahead on their own with lifting restrictions. Biden’s reluctance to get ahead of the CDC — and let science lead the way, as he had promised he would do — resulted in an ad hoc shift across the country.
While the delta and omicron variants were major speed bumps to Biden’s plan to bring the U.S. out of the pandemic — and actions his administration has taken on testing and masking have appeared reactive — the State of the Union address gives the president a chance to reframe his plan to curb COVID.
Unfulfilled promises hamper Biden
Heading into the midterm elections later this year — when Republicans could retake Congress — Biden has left many promises unfulfilled.
His “Build Back Better” social plan has fallen by the wayside, after passing the House and stalling out in the Senate. It would provide hundreds of billions of dollars for child care, paid family leave, education, health care and combating climate change; without its passage, a number of Biden’s campaign pledges remain unmet.
A pair of voting rights bills that passed the House have also languished in the Senate, and efforts to reform policing and guns have not been met with success.
Biden had promised to tackle climate change and racial equity as key priorities, but he has not been able to gain bipartisan support to do so, despite his pledge to soften political divisions.
(WASHINGTON) — The nation’s capital is ramping up security ahead of President Joe Biden’s first State of the Union address on Tuesday.
Up to 700 National Guard troops will “be available to help local law enforcement,” according to the National Guard, and an inner-perimeter fence once again surrounds the Capitol. The Guard announced that these enhanced security measures will be in place through March 7.
The security precautions were put in place to prepare for protests, including truckers against COVID mandates.
On Wednesday, a group of right-wing truckers called the “People’s Convoy,” began a cross-country haul from California to D.C. to protest COVID-19 mandates and restrictions.
It comes in the wake of Canada’s “Freedom Convoy” truckers who forcibly occupied the Ambassador Bridge, connecting Detroit, Michigan with Ontario, Canada, while protesting COVID-19 vaccination mandates in Canada.
Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger announced the fence surrounding the Capitol was erected “out of an abundance of caution in light of the upcoming State of the Union Address, and the possibility of demonstrations in the next couple of weeks,” according to a statement released on Sunday.
The United States Capitol Police have also been working in tandem with local, state and federal law enforcement agencies including D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department, the United States Park Police, the United States Secret Service and the National Guard on a “security plan to prevent any disruption to the important work of Congress,” Manger said.
The fencing, which became politicized following the Jan. 6 riot, was not welcome news to some Republicans.
On Sunday, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said the use of resources for extra security should instead be sent to the border.
“Those National Guard and that fencing should be in America but they should be along our borders not around the people’s house,” McCarthy said on Fox. “The people’s house should be open to the people.”
On the other side of the aisle, Washington, D.C. Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton — who last year introduced a bill to block permanent fencing at the Capitol complex — released a statement saying while she understands “security concerns related to the trucker convoy and the State of the Union address that led to the fencing being temporarily reinstalled” she will “ensure that the fencing comes down as soon as possible to restore freedom of movement for District of Columbia residents and the general public.”
The request for National Guard troops to D.C. was approved by many surrounding states including Vermont, New Jersey and West Virginia but was not approved by Florida, where Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis tweeted “there will be no @FLGuard sent to D.C. for Biden’s State of the Union.”
(WASHINGTON) — Masks will no longer be required in the House chamber when President Joe Biden delivers his State of the Union address Tuesday night, a major reversal in the politically controversial policy that reinforces his message that the pandemic is receding and America is getting back to something closer to normal.
On Sunday, the U.S. Capitol’s attending physician lifted a mask mandate for lawmakers inside the House chamber just two days before Biden’s nationally televised prime-time speech.
The new guidance sharply reduces the chances of a potential confrontation with Republican lawmakers who don’t believe masks are necessary and violate their freedom.
“Individuals may choose to mask at any time, but it is no longer a requirement,” Capitol physician Brian Monahan said in a memo shared Sunday, saying masks in the House chamber and elsewhere on the Capitol grounds are now optional after about two years of being required.
All 535 members of Congress are also invited to attend Biden’s address this year due to the relaxed coronavirus measures, a marked difference from last year’s address, when only 200 members showed up due to stringent COVID-19 policies.
The shift in guidance comes just two weeks after the Capitol physician and House sergeant at arms initially warned that attendees must wear a KN95/N95 mask to Biden’s speech and if they refused, they would risk being removed from the chamber or fined.
Republicans have sought for months to reverse House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s mandate, even going as far as filing a federal lawsuit.
It’s unclear at this point how many Republican lawmakers will actually show up to hear Biden’s address in person, but at least two Republicans have announced they will not attend due to other COVID requirements for attendees, which include getting a COVID test at least one day before the speech.
“I don’t have time to go take a COVID test today. I only take a test if I’m sick,” GOP Sen. Marco Rubio told reporters Monday.
GOP Rep. Chip Roy of Texas tweeted in response to Rubio’s statement late Monday: “Same. I will not attend.”
The move to remove the mask mandate at the Capitol ahead of Biden’s speech highlights the quickly evolving conditions of the pandemic and how eager some Democrats, including the president himself, are about projecting a “return to normalcy.”
Monahan noted in his letter that the “Washington DC region is now in the ‘green level’ or low level in this new CDC schema allowing for reduction in coronavirus prevention measures such as coronavirus testing frequency and indoor mask wear.”
He added that positive COVID-19 test rates at the Capitol are down to 2.7% in the last two weeks, below the current rate for the D.C. Metropolitan area of 4.7%.
Monahan’s announcement came just after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also updated its mask guidance late last week, easing its recommendations on masks for most Americans living in communities with “low” or “medium” levels of coronavirus.
This all comes as many governors — many of them Democrats — are also easing up on mask mandates.
On Monday, White House press secretary Jen Psaki denied Biden had any role in masks not being required in the House chamber for his speech.
“The president is very powerful, but he couldn’t make us be in the green zone that we’re in right now in D.C., that’s why we are not required, we’re not going to be required to wear masks starting tomorrow,” she said, referring to D.C. and the White House lifting mask mandates as of March 1.
“For him, it had nothing to do with the timing around the State of the Union,” she added. “He wanted to give the CDC the time to assess and make recommendations that would be clear to the American public about what their recommendations would be for mask wearing moving forward.”
A White House official confirmed to ABC News that masks will no longer be required for fully vaccinated individuals on the White House campus, either, starting Tuesday.
(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden will deliver the State of the Union address Tuesday night amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine, changing public health guidance around COVID-19 and as the nomination process for his Supreme Court pick gets underway.
Shortly after, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds will deliver the GOP response to Biden’s speech.
Coverage will air on Tuesday from 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. ET on ABC. The speech is being broadcast on ABC stations, as well as Hulu, Roku, YouTube TV, Amazon Fire tablets and TV stick, Xumo, Sling TV, Facebook, Twitter, ABCNews.com and the ABC News and ABC mobile apps.
Biden, whose address begins at 9 p.m. ET, is expected to speak on a variety of issues facing the nation, with a specific focus on the economy as inflation soars and supply chain problems create shortages across the country.
ABC News Live will stream from Capitol Hill throughout the day, with live coverage of the State of the Union address beginning at 8 p.m. ET and a roundtable with Houston voters on what they hope to hear from the president’s speech. At 11 p.m. ET, ABC News Live will feature lawmakers from both sides of the aisle reacting to the speeches.
ABC News Digital will have an up-to-the-minute live blog, key takeaways focusing on main themes, an analysis of the speeches’ political implications and full transcripts of and reaction to the remarks.
(NEW YORK) — Former President Donald Trump on Monday sought to recast his administration’s role in bolstering Europe’s security, claiming credit for strengthening NATO and arming Ukraine’s military with advanced weaponry.
But critics were quick to point out that Trump, whose “America First” foreign policy slogan often reflected efforts to pull back from allies, frequently undermined NATO and once threatened to withhold military aide from Ukraine — a move that was deemed illegal by a government watchdog and became central to Trump’s first impeachment trial in Congress.
“It was Trump that undermined U.S. national security and froze military assistance to Ukraine,” retired Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a former National Security Council official during the Trump administration who testified at the impeachment inquiry, told ABC News on Monday. “It was Trump’s attacks on NATO and support from the far-right that encouraged Putin to believe that NATO was fragile. Trump has blood on his hands.”
Nonetheless, as Russian troops continued to clash with Ukrainian forces Monday, Trump boasted of fortifying Ukraine’s defense capabilities and declared that “there would be no NATO” if not for his efforts.
“I hope everyone is able to remember that it was me, as President of the United States, that got delinquent NATO members to start paying their dues, which amounted to hundreds of billions of dollars,” Trump said in a statement.
“Also, it was me that got Ukraine the very effective anti-tank busters (Javelins) when the previous Administration was sending blankets,” he said. “Let History so note!”
Despite his claims of saving NATO, an alliance of 29 countries on both sides of the Atlantic, the Trump administration oversaw a period of immense strain with allies in Europe. As president, Trump wavered on his commitment to Article 5 of the NATO charter, which stipulates that an attack on one member state amounts to attack on them all.
Mick Mulroy, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense during the Trump administration and now an ABC News contributor, characterized Article 5 as “what makes NATO the most effective military alliance in history.”
Ties with Europe became so strained during Trump’s presidency that Trump reportedly discussed removing the U.S. from NATO entirely. Two of Trump’s former national security advisers, John Bolton and Gen. John Kelly, have said publicly that Trump expressed an interest in exiting the alliance.
“To the extent President Trump’s rhetoric around NATO helped increase defense spending, it was likely more out of a fear that the U.S. commitment to European security was faltering rather than a positive reinforcement of mutual commitments to the Alliance and Euro-Atlantic security,” said Steven Keil, a fellow at the German Marshall Fund.
Critics also took note of Trump’s invocation of the Javelin, a shoulder-fired precision missile system designed to destroy tanks and other armored vehicles, in his infamous July 2019 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
Trump, in 2018, had approved the $47 million sale of 210 Javelin anti-tank missiles and 37 launchers to Ukraine — the first lethal military assistance provided to Ukraine by the U.S. in its fight against Russian-supported separatists since fighting began in 2014. Zelenskyy told Trump in the 2019 phone call that his government was “almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes,” according to a readout of the call.
Trump responded: “I would like you to do us a favor though,” and then pressured Zelenskyy to work with U.S. Attorney General William Barr and his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to publicly announce an investigation into then-candidate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, who had previously served on the board of a Ukrainian oil firm. The Democratic-controlled House of Representatives voted to impeach Trump over the incident, but he was acquitted by the Republican-controlled Senate.
The U.S. Government Accountability Office later found that the Trump administration broke the law in withholding nearly $400 million in congressional appropriations earmarked for Ukraine. The funds were eventually released, and the Trump administration denied any wrongdoing.
(WASHINGTON) — Jury selection was set to begin Monday morning in the case of Guy Reffitt, who faces five felony counts in the first trial of an alleged participant in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
The stakes are high for prosecutors because the trial will be closely watched by hundreds of other Jan. 6 defendants who have yet to enter into plea deals with the government.
It marks a significant turning point for the Justice Department nearly 14 months into its sprawling criminal investigation of the attack, and depending on the outcome, could prompt guilty pleas or encourage defendants to fight in court.
Reffitt, a 49-year-old man from Wylie, Texas, a suburb of Dallas, is one of several Jan. 6 rioters accused of possessing a firearm while on Capitol grounds. Prosecutors say he traveled from his home in Texas to Washington with an AR-15 rifle and Smith and Wesson .40 caliber pistol, though he is only alleged to have carried the pistol in a holster during the riot itself.
He was seen in pictures and videos with the mob outside the West Front of the Capitol, wearing body armor, a helmet and carrying flexicuffs, prosecutors said.
He allegedly “confronted Capitol Police officers” on stairs just north of the temporary scaffolding that had been put up in advance of the Biden inauguration. At one point he allegedly charged at police, but was stopped after they shot him with two different types of less-than-lethal projectiles and then pepper spray. After returning home following the riot, Reffitt is alleged to have threatened his children if they reported him to law enforcement.
Reffitt has been held in pre-trial detention since arrest on Jan. 16, 2021, due to his alleged dangerousness to the general public. Reffitt’s trial will take place at the D.C. District Court in Washington, D.C. Jury selection is expected to last a day or two.
In a recent filing, prosecutors said they expect to call 13 witnesses in Reffitt’s trial. This will include representatives from Capitol Police, the FBI, Secret Service, a counsel to the Secretary of the Senate, Reffitt’s son and daughter, and a fellow member of the Three Percenter militia who traveled with Reffitt to D.C. and has been granted immunity for his testimony.
Reffitt is not alleged to have entered the Capitol, but prosecutors are looking to persuade a jury that he joined with hundreds of others in the mob seeking to disrupt Congress’ certification of Biden’s election win.
Reffitt’s attorneys tried and failed to get Judge Friedrich to dismiss the charge against him that he sought to obstruct the certification — the felony charge that is one of the most crucial to Justice Department’s prosecution of the riot and which has been leveled against more than 275 other defendants. The charge itself carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.
Reffitt’s attorney, William Welch, has argued there are several deficiencies in the government’s case. Specifically, he has sought to argue that Congress’ convening on Jan. 6 to certify the results of the 2020 election should not count as an “official proceeding” under law, and that there is no evidence Reffitt acted “corruptly” with the intention of disrupting lawmakers discharging their duties that day. Welch has also argued Reffitt’s comments to his family that he was charged for were merely “idle threats,” and noted that Reffitt’s wife and daughter both have said they never feared for their personal safety despite his comments.
Reffitt spoke to ABC News from jail in December, saying, “This has been disastrous for me and my family, especially for my girls, my son — actually, all of my family.” He also said he believes he’ll be exonerated at trial. “It’s not that hard to prove that I didn’t do anything,” Reffitt said. “It should be pretty easy.”
According to recent filings in the case, prosecutors will look to underscore the dangers that the pro-Trump mob posed to lawmakers, former Vice President Pence and American democracy itself as they attacked the Capitol that day.
At the trial, first-hand accounts from government officials as well as a mountain of video are expected to be shown. Photo and audio evidence that they’ll use to implicate Reffitt as they paint a picture of an American man radicalized to carry out an attack against his own government and the rule of law.
(WASHINGTON) — As the impacts of global climate change exact an increasingly dire human and economic toll, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday is considering a major challenge to the power of the Environmental Protection Agency to combat greenhouse gas emissions from thousands of American power plants.
The justices are hearing oral arguments in a case — West Virginia v. EPA — that pits major coal and mining companies and Republican-led states against the Biden administration, power utilities and public health groups that see EPA’s authority as critical for curbing the climate crisis.
The outcome of the case could determine whether the U.S. will be able to meet a government goal of cutting carbon pollution by 50% over the next eight years and shifting entirely to clean energy sources by 2035, experts say.
“We need every tool in the toolbox to address climate change,” said Vickie Patton, general counsel of the Environmental Defense Fund. “An action [by the Court] here is a real setback.”
The landmark Clean Air Act of 1970 charged the EPA with protecting human health from dangerous airborne contaminants, which the Supreme Court has twice affirmed to include greenhouse gasses.
The law lets the agency craft pollution limits based on the “best system of emission reduction” available, but there is disagreement over whether the law prohibits consideration of measures “outside the fence line” of a particular plant, such as shifting to alternative sources of power generation or emission trading programs.
The U.S. power sector is the nation’s second-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions.
Plaintiffs in the EPA case claim the agency is seeking to “reshape the power grids and seize control over electricity production nationwide,” according to court documents, a characterization the government disputes.
The justices will first need to decide whether there’s even a live dispute worth adjudicating. While the case originated as a challenge to the Obama administration’s 2015 Clean Power Plan, that policy was subsequently put on hold and has never taken effect.
The states and coal companies argue that a lower court decision, if allowed to stand, effectively empowers the EPA to threaten entire industries and tens of thousands of American jobs. The Biden administration says the warnings are premature, noting its emission guidelines have not yet been published, much less enforced.
“Petitioners are seeking a ruling on what EPA might do in the future, but federal courts do not have jurisdiction to decide cases on what could happen,” said Andrew Restrepo, a senior attorney with the Sierra Club. The states and coal companies “do not and cannot explain how they would be injured.”
The Supreme Court showdown comes the same day the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned in a new report of impending catastrophic harms from the unchecked rise in carbon pollution.
“What we’re arguing about is the scope of the means, or the way the [EPA emissions] standard can be constructed,” said David Doniger, an attorney with the National Resources Defense Council and former EPA lawyer. “We want EPA to be able to look at a range of measures beyond efficiency tuneups” at power plants.
A decision against the agency could also have implications for the ability of other government agencies to set health and safety regulations across entire sectors of the nation’s economy, legal analysts said.
Conservative legal scholars, including several members of the high court, have long argued that major administrative rules governing American life must be specifically approved by Congress in order to be legal.
Last month, the justices blocked the Occupational Health and Safety Administration’s vaccine-or-test mandate for large employers on those grounds, while last summer the court rolled back the CDC’s pandemic eviction moratorium as an illegal overreach.
“If there are enormous decisions that have vast political and economic significance, Congress — if they want an agency to deal with it — should speak clearly to that issue,” said Jeff Holmstead, a former EPA official who served during the George W. Bush administration and has represented clients challenging recent EPA emissions regulations.
There are more than 3,300 fossil fuel-fired power plants in the U.S., including 284 coal-fired facilities, according to the U.S. Energy Information Agency. An estimated 1.7 million Americans work in fossil fuel industries, from mining to pipeline construction to electricity generation.
In a landmark 2007 decision, Massachusetts v EPA, the Supreme Court by a 5-4 vote authorized the agency to regulate greenhouse gasses as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. Four years later in American Electric Power v. Connecticut, the justices again affirmed that “Congress delegated to EPA the decision whether and how to regulate carbon-dioxide emissions from power plants.”
Doniger said if the Court rolls back that authority a “huge swath” of the regulatory state could potentially be upended by extension.
“Legislation that people rely on to structure their businesses or protect themselves from predatory business practices, fraud in commercial transactions, in the securities market — all of that would seem to be imperiled if this is imperiled,” he said.
In a friend-of-the-court filing in the case, a coalition of medical groups, including the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Physicians have implored the justices to take a broad view.
“Climate pollutants’ most grievous harms beset children and families, pregnant women, people over 65 and communities of color and of low income,” they wrote.
“The Court should be mindful of Congress’s decision to provide EPA regulatory authority to address this type of threat to public health. Any retrenchment in the scope of that authority would inflict further harm to the health of current and future generations.”
(NEW YORK) — Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., has refused to condemn former President Donald Trump’s praise of Russian President Vladimir Putin amid his invasion of Ukraine.
“George, if you want to know what Donald Trump thinks about Vladimir Putin or any other topic, I’d encourage you to invite him on your show,” Cotton told ABC “This Week” anchor George Stephanopoulos on Sunday. “I don’t speak on behalf of other politicians. They can speak for themselves.”
Trump called the actions of the Russian president “genius” and “savvy” during an interview with the conservative radio program “The Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Show” on Tuesday. And on Saturday night at the Conservative Political Action Conference, Trump finally condemned the invasion but also said, “The problem is not that Putin is smart, which of course he’s smart. But the real problem is that our leaders are dumb.”
Stephanopoulos pressed Cotton, who he noted has been steadfast in his opposition to Putin, to condemn the comments.
“You’re a senior member of the Republican Party. Donald Trump is the leader of the Republican Party,” he said, noting that Trump “suggested” Saturday night he would run for president again. “When Fox News asked him if he had a message for Vladimir Putin, he said he has no message.”
“Why can’t you condemn that? I feel quite confident that if Donald — that if Barack Obama or Joe Biden said something like that, you’d be first in line to criticize them,” Stephanopoulos said.
Cotton, who sits on the Senate Intelligence and Armed Services committees, doubled down.
“Again, George, if you want to talk to the former president about his views or his message, you can have him on your show,” Cotton said. “My message to Vladimir Putin is quite clear: He needs to leave Ukraine unless he wants to face moms and teenagers with Molotov cocktails and grandmothers and grandfathers with AK-47s for years to come.”
Stephanopoulos followed up again.
“I simply don’t understand why you can’t condemn his praise of Vladimir Putin,” he said.
“George, again, I don’t speak on behalf of other politicians, they can all speak for themselves,” Cotton responded, again dodging Stephanopoulos’ question. “I’m delivering my message to you, which I said has been clear, whether Barack Obama was president, whether Donald Trump was president, and now whether Joe Biden was president, that Vladimir Putin has been a ruthless dictator for years. Too many people have not taken the threat seriously. And that’s why you see the images we see in Ukraine now. And where we need to focus is on stopping that aggression, supporting the Ukrainians as best we can.”
In an earlier interview on “This Week,” Oksana Markarova, the Ukrainian ambassador to the U.S., pleaded for American businesses to stop backing Russian-owned enterprises both at home and abroad.
Cotton agreed with the ambassador, encouraging “every American company to scrub all of their operations to provide no support whatsoever to Vladimir Putin’s regime” while Russia continues carrying out an “unprovoked war of aggression.”
“But we can do more than prayers and hashtags and lighting up buildings, George. It’s time for the president and some of our European partners to quit pussyfooting around,” Cotton later added. “The financial sanctions announced last night are riddled with loopholes.”
The United States and other Western nations announced Saturday they would significantly escalate restrictions against Russia’s financial system. Sanctions against major Russian banks, members of the Russian elite and Putin had already been imposed by the United States and its allies. The U.S. and other nations have also stepped up military aid to Ukraine. The countries, however, have yet to launch crippling sanctions against Russia’s oil and gas industry, which Cotton has been advocating for. Russia provides more than a third of Europe’s natural gas.
Putin announced Sunday he had ordered his military to put Russia’s nuclear deterrent forces in a state of heightened readiness in response to what he called “aggressive statements” from NATO countries.
“It’s time to remove all Russian financial institutions from the international payment system. It’s time to impose sanctions on his oil and gas exports which he uses as his primary means of financial support,” Cotton said. “We need to rush those weapons that were announced for delivery yesterday to the front: anti-tank, anti-aircraft missiles, sniper rifles ammunition, fuel supplies, it should have been done weeks ago so better later than never but the Ukrainians have no time.”
ABC News’ Ben Gittleson and Lucien Bruggeman contributed to this report.
