The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in March stayed Cain’s injunction, ruling that Louisiana and the other states lacked standing to directly challenge the metric, but must challenge it as it applied to a specific regulations.
Appeal to the Supreme Court: Louisiana appealed to the Supreme Court for help, claiming that the metric is “a power grab designed to manipulate the entire US federal regulatory apparatus”. The Biden Administration pushed backarguing once again that the States lacked standing and that the challenge was premature.
In a small order Released Thursday, the court sided with the Biden administration, rejecting Louisiana’s emergency motion without explanation. There were no dissents noted.
Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry’s office and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
And after: The litigation continues to unfold before the 5th Circuit. But this court’s strongly worded temporary suspension of Cain’s injunction, together with the lack of interest on the part of the bench court or the Supreme Court, does not bode well for the Louisiana case.
The White House interagency task force is expected to come up with a broader update to the social cost measure in the coming months, though an exact timeline is unclear. Experts argue that advances in climate and economic forecasts justify raising the figure to $200 or more.
The context: The Supreme Court’s refusal to get involved in the Louisiana lawsuit is likely a bad sign for similar but separate lawsuits in Missouri and other states. In the case of Missouri, a district court judge threw the lawsuit last year after finding that the states lacked reputation, much like the 5th Circuit concluded about Louisiana.
The Missouri lawsuit is on appeal to the 8th Circuit, where oral arguments are scheduled for June 16. The 8th Circuit is not bound by the 5th Circuit’s decision, but will likely take note of the Supreme Court’s decision not to overturn it.