Why do the Supreme Court ruled in favor of EPA?

By Emily K. Nelson and Lauren PettyjohnThe Supreme Court has struck down the EPA’s proposed rules to regulate emissions from coal-fired power plants, allowing them to go into effect on Monday.

The ruling by the conservative justices on Monday afternoon was one of a string of major environmental rulings the court struck down in the past month.

It was also one of the court’s most significant environmental victories in decades.

While the ruling is a victory for the Trump administration, the court was also a setback for the coal industry.

It will now likely force the U.S. to shift from the Clean Power Plan, a sweeping EPA plan that would have required states to cut their carbon emissions.

The ruling also sets up a showdown over a separate measure from the Trump Administration, the Waters of the U: Clean Water Rule, that would require states to take action to limit the discharge of pollutants from wetlands.

The court also struck down an Obama-era rule to protect endangered species in federal waters, saying the rule was too broad.

The rules are expected to reduce pollution from coal power plants and reduce the amount of coal that can be burned.

They will also help protect waterways and wetlands from pollution from the burning of natural gas and oil, according to the EPA.

The agency also said that the rules would help reduce mercury emissions from the nation’s power plants.

The EPA’s rule has been opposed by coal-dependent states such as Ohio, Kentucky and West Virginia, as well as the National Mining Association, the industry’s main lobbying group.

The coal industry has been lobbying to overturn the ruling.

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy called it a “disaster” for the American people and vowed to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Courts.