This is the Cato Daily Podcast for Friday, September 23rd, 2022.

I'm Caleb Brown.

In West Virginia V EPA, the Supreme Court issued its most significant administrative and regulatory decision of the term

with far-reaching implications for how agencies are allowed to view their mandates.

What does that mean going forward? At the Cato Institute's Constitution Day event Jonathan

Adler gave his mixed assessment of the decision?

It's a pleasure to be here.

It's always fun to be back at Cato and to be here for Constitution Day to see Roger who I used to debate

constitutional law questions with when I was a mere college student in the

in the basement of the old Waterston House in my first summer being involved with Cato.

And it's a pleasure to talk about West Virginia University, a fun case, a case that concerns

the Clean Air Act, which is an act that some of us have learned to know and love very deeply or at least have a love hate relationship with.

And just to kind of give the quick overview

or the quick summary of my views about Western University

EPA, I have very mixed feelings about this case.

I think as a pure matter of law the court reached what was clearly

the correct result in that the EPA was asserting authority that Congress had

never delegated to it.

On the other hand, the sort of power that EPA wanted to exercise

is as far as climate policies go, certainly better

than a lot of the alternatives that EPA

has been delegated the authority, or at least

...