As Justice Kagan's dissent spells out, the Roberts Court majority abandoned its "textualist" principles, and invented this decision's "major questions doctrine" to reach the desired outcome.
For my part, I cannot fathom how or why any regulatory state would make a distinction between individual power generator and the overall grid. They're inseparable.
Further, under the (never implemented) plan, power shifting was incentivized, earning the generators more ROI. Basically a financial life line for utilities.
So why are they complaining?
The reason isn't financial or environmental. The ideological reason is the dismantling of the administrative state. By inserting itself into the policy review process, the Roberts Court introduces confusion and delay, ultimately yielding inaction.
For my part, I cannot fathom how or why any regulatory state would make a distinction between individual power generator and the overall grid. They're inseparable.
Further, under the (never implemented) plan, power shifting was incentivized, earning the generators more ROI. Basically a financial life line for utilities.
So why are they complaining?
The reason isn't financial or environmental. The ideological reason is the dismantling of the administrative state. By inserting itself into the policy review process, the Roberts Court introduces confusion and delay, ultimately yielding inaction.