On Monday night, the networks showed scant interest in covering the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling against the Obama administration and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on the regulation of power plant emissions as NBC ignored the story completely with ABC and CBS combining to spend only 29 seconds on the decision.
In contrast, all three network evening newscasts found time to spend one minute and seven seconds on the Court’s decision to place a stay on a pro-life Texas law that would further regulate the state’s abortion facilities and was welcomed by abortion activists who feared the closure of some facilities.
With NBC Nightly News refusing to acknowledge the ruling concerning the EPA, ABC’s World News Tonight dedicated 10 seconds of 46-second news brief to the 5-4 decision that fill-in anchor Amy Robach described as “dealing a blow to President Obama” as they “rul[ed] against an EPA regulation that would limit toxic emissions from power plants.”
Over on the CBS Evening News, anchor Scott Pelley barely did any better than ABC’s Robach as he devoted 19 seconds to the EPA ruling after a report from Justice correspondent Jan Crawford on the Court’s decision regarding a lethal injection case and the stay in the pro-life Texas law:
In another important ruling today, the Supreme Court threw out one of the President's Clean Air initiatives. The EPA had imposed rules on power plants to reduce toxins such as mercury, but the justices said that the EPA did not do enough to take costs into consideration.
While ABC and CBS came together to spend just under 30 seconds on this story, the Fox News Channel’s Special Report led off its Monday night broadcast with a segment by correspondent Shannon Bream on the final rulings of the Court’s term (with two minutes and 23 seconds spent on the EPA case).
Host Bret Baier explained that the “justices went the other way today in a big ruling against the Environmental Protection Agency's war on coal” following two wins in the previous week for the President on ObamaCare and gay marriage. Before tossing to Bream, Baier detailed how “[t]he majority ruled that the administration's attempt to regulate the industry into oblivion is not worth the cost.”
Bream reported from outside the Supreme Court and provided quotes from both the majority and dissenting opinions as well as a brief explanation of the case and its ruling:
In the last of its opinions for this term, the Supreme Court put the Environmental Protection Agency on notice, making it clear that the agency cannot issue sweeping regulations without considering the real world cost of compliance. Michigan and 22 other states had argued the EPA’s new rules regulating power plant emissions were wildly out of whack, touting roughly $4 to $6 million in health benefits, yet ignoring $10 billion in compliance costs.
Bream also reported that those against the regulations feared that “the compliance costs would be so overwhelming that they could force some plants to close, block the opening of new ones, costs thousands of U.S. jobs, and cause electricity costs to spike for all Americans.”
Despite the ruling, Bream brought up how “[t]he administration is vowing to move forward, despite today’s ruling.”
Instead of giving more time to this defeat for the Obama administration, the CBS Evening News gave a full profile to a New York-based wedding photographer who’s “documenting” the “evolution of American marriage” with the legalization of gay marriage and a growing diversity in couples getting married.
The relevant portion of the transcript from FNC’s Special Report with Bret Baier on June 29 can be found below.
FNC’s Special Report with Bret Baier
June 29, 2015
6:00 p.m. Eastern [TEASE]BRET BAIER: After a series of losses, conservatives get a victory at the U.S. Supreme Court, rebuffing President Obama's EPA moves that experts say would cripple the coal industry.
(....)
6:00 p.m. Eastern
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE CAPTION: Victory for Coal]
BRET BAIER: After chalking up two solid wins in President Obama’s column next week, Supreme Court justices went the other way today in a big ruling against the Environmental Protection Agency's war on coal. The majority ruled that the administration's attempt to regulate the industry into oblivion is not worth the cost. Shannon Bream is at the Supreme Court tonight.
SHANNON BREAM: In the last of its opinions for this term, the Supreme Court put the Environmental Protection Agency on notice, making it clear that the agency cannot issue sweeping regulations without considering the real world cost of compliance. Michigan and 22 other states had argued the EPA’s new rules regulating power plant emissions were wildly out of whack, touting roughly $4 to $6 million in health benefits, yet ignoring $10 billion in compliance costs. Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said, quote, “one would not say that it is even rational, never mind ‘appropriate,’ to impose billions of dollars on economic costs in return for a few dollars in health or environmental benefits,” ultimately holding that the EPA acted, quote, “unreasonably when it deemed cost irrelevant to the decision to regulate power plants.”
PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION’s TODD GAZIANO: Today's decision affirms a very common sense principle that EPA often ignores and that is that agencies most must consider both the benefits and their costs of regulations.
BREAM: In her dissent, Justice Elena Kagan found the EPA had taken some costs into account and said the majority’s, quote, “micromanagement of EPA’s rulemaking, based on little more than the word ‘appropriate’ – runs counter to Congress’s allocation of authority between the agency and the courts.” The EPA maintains that “for every dollar spent to reduce toxic pollution from power plants, the American public would see up to $9 in health benefits.”
EPA ADMINISTRATOR GINA MCCARTHY: It's not a setback. It’s an extra step, but this rule’s been a long time coming.
BREAM: Critics of the new rule predicted the compliance costs would be so overwhelming that they could force some plants to close, block the opening of new ones, costs thousands of U.S. jobs, and cause electricity costs to spike for all Americans, but they shouldn’t celebrate just yet. The administration is vowing to move forward, despite today’s ruling.
WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY JOSH EARNEST: There is no reason that this Court ruling should have any impact on the ability of the administration to develop and implement the clean power plan.
BREAM: And like the other two final opinions we got today, this one was a 5-4 split.
