Supreme Court of United States<\/b>: Dealing with a case relating to the issue that whether it was permissible for Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to determine that its motor-vehicle greenhouse-gas Regulations automatically triggered the Clean Air Act permitting requirements for stationary sources that emit greenhouse gases , the Court held that EPA\u2019s interpretation of the ‘ Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting requirement’ as applying to \u201cany regulated air pollutant\u201d was \u201ccompelled by the statute\u201d was erroneous as EPA was mistaken in thinking the Act compelled <\/i>a greenhouse-gas-inclusive interpreta\u00adtion of the PSD and Title V triggers. Stating the reasons for coming to this conclusion, the Court held that such interpretation would not only place plainly excessive demands on limited governmental resources but would also bring about an enormous and transformative expansion in EPA\u2019s regulatory authority without clear congressional authorization. The Court was of the opinion that recognizing the authority claimed by EPA in the Tailoring Rule would result into a severe blow to the Constitution\u2019s separation of powers as it is for the legislature to make laws and for the President, acting at times through agencies like EPA, to execute them.<\/p>\n
\n