评论
打印
The Supreme Court on Thursday limited the E.P.A. (Environmental Protection Agency)’s ability to regulate carbon emissions from power plants, making it much tougher for President Biden to achieve his goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions in half by the end of the decade.
周四，最高法院限制了环境保护局监管发电厂排碳的职能，这使得拜登总统更难实现他的目标，即在2030年结束前将温室气体排放量减少一半。
The vote was 6 to 3, with the court’s three liberal justices in dissent, saying that the majority had stripped the E.P.A. of “the power to respond to the most pressing environmental challenge of our time.”
投票结果是6比3，最高法院的三名自由派法官持有不同意见，称多数人将环保局“应对我们这个时代最紧迫的环境挑战的权力”剥夺了。
In ruling against the E.P.A., the Supreme Court again waded into a politically divisive issue on the final day of a blockbuster term, adding to the conservative supermajority’s decisions to eliminate the constitutional right to abortion, vastly expand gun rights and further erode the wall separating church and state.
在对环保局不利的裁决中，最高法院在引起轰动的任期的最后一天，再次介入了一个具有政治分歧的问题，增加了保守派占绝对多数裁决的支持率，这些裁决包括废除宪法规定的堕胎权，极大地扩大持枪权，以及进一步侵蚀政教分离的围墙。
The implications of the ruling could extend well beyond environmental policy.
这项裁决的影响可能远远超出环境政策。
It also signals that the court’s newly expanded conservative majority is deeply skeptical of the power of administrative agencies to address major issues facing the nation and the planet.
这也表明，最高法院新扩大的保守派多数席位对行政机构解决国家和地球面临的重大问题的能力深表怀疑。
The decision set off criticism from the left, but voices from the coal industry and conservative states praised the ruling.
这一裁决招致了左翼的批评，但来自煤炭行业和保守州的声音称赞了这一裁决。
Mr. Biden, left with far fewer tools to fight climate change, said the ruling was “another devastating decision that aims to take our country backwards.”
拜登所剩的应对气候变化的工具要少得多，他表示这项裁决是“又一个毁灭性的决定，旨在让我们的国家倒退。”
He vowed to take action even as the court limited his ability to act, adding: “We cannot and will not ignore the danger to public health and existential threat the climate crisis poses.”
他誓言要采取行动，尽管法院限制了他的执行能力，他补充说：“我们不能也不会忽视气候危机对公共健康和生存的威胁。”
Patrick Morrisey, the attorney general of West Virginia and one of the leaders of the challenge to the E.P.A.’s authority, welcomed the decision.
西弗吉尼亚州司法部长帕特里克·莫里西是挑战环保局权威的领导者之一，他对这一裁决表示欢迎。
“E.P.A. can no longer sidestep Congress to exercise broad regulatory power that would radically transform the nation’s energy grid and force states to fundamentally shift their energy portfolios away from coal-fired generation,” he said.
他说，“环保局不能再绕过国会行使广泛的监管权力，这将从根本上改变美国的能源网络，迫使各州从根本上改变其能源投资组合，不再使用燃煤发电。”
Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. only glancingly alluded to the harms caused by climate change.
代表多数派的首席大法官小约翰·罗伯茨只是粗略地提到了气候变化造成的危害。
Justice Elena Kagan began her dissent with a long passage detailing the devastation the planet faces, including hurricanes, floods, famines, coastal erosion, mass migration and political crises.
大法官埃琳娜·卡根则以一段很长的文字提出了她的异议，详细描述了地球面临的破坏，包括飓风、洪水、饥荒、海岸侵蚀、大规模移民和政治危机。
