quote:
Federal agencies are continuing to defend some legal positions of the Biden administration, according to an analysis by two conservative groups.

Leaders of the groups Power the Future and Defend Forgotten America sent a letter Tuesday to President Donald Trump and Attorney General Todd Blanche calling for a comprehensive review of lawsuits involving regulations and legal positions adopted or defended by the Obama and Biden administrations.

The letter highlights several lawsuits involving energy, environmental, and health care regulation.

“Inconsistent execution of your presidential authority must cease,” says the letter to Trump, signed by Daniel Turner, executive director of Power the Future; Jenn Pellegrino, CEO of Defend Forgotten America, or DFA; and Ali Bartlett, the DFA counsel.

“Some agencies have yet to fully align their litigation positions expressly with the Administration’s announced policy. Others continue to defend inherited positions that warrant review under your directives,” the letter states.

Among the biggest cases mentioned pertains to the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan, designed to spur a massive shift of energy production from coal and gas to wind and solar. The Supreme Court found that the Environmental Protection Agency lacked the authority to implement the sweeping plan in the case of West Virginia v. EPA.

Following the ruling, the agency finalized a partial repeal of the regulations in September, set to take effect in November, but “leaves some requirements in place, which EPA proposes to rescind separately,” the letter says.

“EPA and DOJ should explain what issues remain for judicial resolution and seek the appropriate disposition,” the letter says.

The letter also references the ongoing case of Texas v. Oz, where the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is defending a Biden-era policy that threatens funding mechanisms for rural and some urban hospitals. The agency’s interpretation could jeopardize billions of dollars in Medicaid funding, the letter says, adding that the agency demanded compliance in a Florida case after a federal judge had issued an injunction in the same matter in Texas.

“Rather than reconsider its interpretation after the district court rejected it, CMS treated the injunction’s geographic limitation to Texas as an opening to press the same policy in other States,” the letter states.