The Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit denied a petition by Massachusetts seeking EPA action on greenhouse gas (GHG) regulation within 60 days. Yesterday’s decision is part of the longstanding feud between the EPA and a group of states and environmental organizations.

In April 2007, the Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. EPA that the agency must determine whether GHG emissions from automobiles endanger public health and welfare. After one year passed with no action, Massachusetts filed a writ of mandamus in the DC Circuit. Plaintiffs bring a mandamus action to seek the court’s help when a government official refuses to take a required action. The court, however, declined to act on the writ, denying the petition without comment.

Judge David Tatel issued a separate opinion, where he noted that the Supreme Court did not institute “a specific deadline” for EPA action on GHG regulation in this case, and that it is not uncommon for complex issues to take more than a year to resolve.

The plaintiffs argue that the EPA is stalling on action, pointing to the non-compliance with an order by the Supreme Court and the agency’s recent statement that it will prepare an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking for regulating GHGs. The EPA insists that the issues involved are complex and not well-suited to the framework of the Clean Air Act, which was designed to deal with local, not global, pollutants.

The end result of the decision is that GHG regulation will now become an issue for the next President, as it will be nearly impossible for the current administration to develop and issue a final rule before January 2009.

For further information about this topic, please contact Akin Gump.