From NRO’s editorial this morning on the power grab by the EPA:

Let’s Vote on It
One of the many troubling aspects of the Obama administration is its eagerness to use the federal regulatory apparatus to achieve its political goals when it cannot advance them through the democratic process in Congress. The sterling example of this is the EPA’s push to enact, on self-asserted authority, new limitations on the emission of carbon dioxide and other so-called greenhouse gases. The EPA’s decision to do so was explicitly political: It telegraphed its intention to act unilaterally should Congress fail to enact the package of taxes and restrictions known as “cap and trade.” Mindful that the legislation would impose real costs in the here and now but offer only theoretical benefits, and those at some far remove in the future, Congress wisely rejected the bill. And so EPA’s bureaucrats went to their battle stations. Put another way, our elected representatives have failed to comply with the desires of our unelected masters, and the unelected government proposes to assert its supremacy.
Congressional Republicans on Wednesday pushed back, as it was necessary to do, with Sen. Jim Inhofe and Rep. Fred Upton introducing legislation curtailing the EPA’s unilateral ambitions.
There is a good deal at stake here, and the heavy economic burden that would accompany this regulation is the least of it. We are reminded, unnecessarily, that the Democratic party is comically misnamed, inasmuch as its members habitually seek to impose their agenda through such undemocratic or even antidemocratic means as judicial fiats and regulatory overrides of democratic decisions. Both of those are a feature of the present dispute, the EPA’s arrogant regulatory overreach having been unleashed by Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens’s opinion in Massachusetts v. EPA, the result of a finding that Chief Justice John Roberts rightly denounced as a transgression of the Court’s constitutional limits.

The rest here.