Climate emergency: limited Biden executive power

White House Climate Emergency Gives Biden New Powers To Reach Goals | US Politics :60 | GZERO Media

Jon Lieber, head of Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington, DC, shares his analysis on US politics:

What is President Biden doing now that his legislative agenda is all but over?

Congress is getting ready to throw in the towel on 2022, racing to pass several pieces of legislation dealing with healthcare, drug prices and subsidies for the semiconductor industry before they go on their annual recess beginning in August. Some Democrats are holding out hope they can still pass a broader bill to finance green energy investments. But others are already writing the eulogy for the 117th Congress, recognizing how hard it is to legislate in a 50-50 Senate and a narrowly divided House and looking forward to Republicans taking control of at least one branch of government next year.

So what is President Biden going to do without Congress? He doesn't have great options. Democrats are looking to President Biden to drive action on abortion access, voting rights, and now climate change. All issues that Congress could not find big enough majorities to legislate on this year. This week, the Biden administration is attempting to claim progress on their very ambitious environmental agenda. Biden came into office with the goal of getting to a carbon pollution free power sector by 2035 and net zero emissions in the economy by 2050, and he had a plan to get there. An analysis from a team of Princeton University found that the Build Back Better plan passed by the House would've cut greenhouse gas emissions by 5.2 billion tons by 2030, well on the way towards Biden's goal of cutting carbon emissions in half by that point. But unfortunately the Senate couldn't pass that bill. And this week, the White House floated an idea supported by environmental groups, which is declaring a climate change emergency that would give him extraordinary powers to regulate fossil fuel emissions and regulate the carbon footprint of the federal government. But, these powers would likely still be incredibly limited.

The Supreme Court has indicated they would look skeptically on any expansive use of authorities under the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon emissions. And short of sweeping new regulations, Biden's powers are limited to things like redirecting federal funds towards research and development, establishing renewable energy purchase targets for the entire federal government, limiting the expansion of US oil and gas drilling and halting court mandated onshore lease sales. He's politically limited here as well. Anything that hurts domestic energy production is a political risk given high gas prices. The cumulative effect of these policies would fall far short of what would be needed to achieve his emission reductions target. Without congressional support there's only so much Biden can do, and these actions will fall far short of what Senator Sheldon Whitehouse called "executive Beast Mode", surely leaving climate activists disappointed and concerned as the incoming Republican majority in the House is not likely to do anything to reduce emissions.

More from GZERO Media

Syrian forces head to Latakia after fighters linked to Syria's ousted leader Bashar Assad mounted a deadly attack on government forces on Thursday, March 6, 2025.

REUTERS/Mahmoud Hassano

Nearly 50 people were killed on Thursday in the deadliest clashes Syria has seen since the overthrow of Bashar Assad. Pro-Assad militants attacked security checkpoints around the western coastal town of Jableh, a stronghold of the former regime.

The Liberian-flagged tanker Ice Energy, chartered by the US government, takes Iranian oil from Iranian-flagged Lana (formerly Pegas) as part of a civil forfeiture action off the shore of Karystos, on the Island of Evia, Greece, in May 2022.
REUTERS/Costas Baltas/File Photo

The Trump administration is reportedly considering a strategy to disrupt Iran’s oil exports by stopping and inspecting Iranian oil tankers at sea. The US would use the Proliferation Security Initiative, established in 2003 to prevent the trafficking of weapons of mass destruction, as a legal justification for the inspections.

Donald Trump issues a proclamation from the Oval Office
REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

US presidents don’t typically talk to organizations the US government has labeled terrorist groups, but Donald Trump is not a typical US president.

President Donald Trump addresses a joint session of Congress at the US Capitol on March 4, 2025.

Win McNamee/Pool via REUTERS

You didn’t need to sit through all 99 minutes of Trump’s peroration to know that he gave himself an A++ on his first six weeks in office, writes GZERO Publisher Evan Solomon. But if Trump gets to grade himself, maybe it’s time for a more objective report card — one that looks at two criteria: Trump as a dealmaker and Trump as a manager.

The Energy Security Hub at the 2025 Munich Security Conference featured in-depth discussions on energy innovation, security, and market viability. Fatih Birol, IEA executive director, discussed growing global energy demand, especially the rapid rise in electricity outpacing overall growth. He noted electricity demand is projected to increase six times faster than total energy in 10 years, underscoring the need for electrification and grid expansion. As energy systems become decentralized and digitalized, the CEO of E.ON, Leonhard Birnbaum, said: “You’re either fully digitized – or you’re done.” Key takeaways: Energy security requires developing and securing electricity grids Technological openness is a unifying element for getting to net zero Bridge the “Valley of Death” to scale markets New global partnerships will help Europe stay competitive Public acceptance will strengthen democracy You can read the full Executive Summary from the BMW Foundation here.

a crowd of people outside of a white building

In a 5-4 split decision, the US Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the Trump administration to disburse nearly $2 billion in foreign aid funds for work completed by contractors and grant recipients under the US Agency for International Development and the State Department. Does this tell us much about how the top court will handle future Trump-related cases?