"The name of the law at issue before the Supreme Court on Wednesday is the Clean Air Act. It is not the Coal Industry Protection Act, despite what that industry’s advocates seem to want the justices to believe," writes The New York Times editorial board today. The Environmental Protection Agency wants industry (mostly coal-fired power plants) to emit fewer toxic pollutants — like mercury, a documented danger to the developing brain and nervous system. Industry backers like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell call the regs costly and unnecessary.
Clean Air Act opponents, argues The Times, "view every regulation, whether aimed at protecting human lives or the future of the planet, as nothing more than a war on coal. But profits and human health are not mutually exclusive." Why is that so hard to agree on?
