Can EPA Decide Who Stays in Business?

In this episode of Unwritten Law, NCLA President and Chief Legal Officer Mark Chenoweth and Senior Litigation Counsel John Vecchione are joined by NCLA General Counsel Zhonette Brown to discuss the federal government’s response brief in Choice Refrigerants v. EPA, a case asking the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit the nondelegation doctrine.

The discussion focuses on whether Congress unconstitutionally handed the EPA broad authority to determine how shrinking refrigerant allowances are allocated under the AIM Act—effectively deciding which companies can continue operating and which may be pushed out of the market.

Zhonette explains why the case is not simply about environmental regulation, but about who controls market share and economic liberty in America. The conversation explores the “gaping hole” in the statute identified by NCLA: while Congress specified detailed chemical formulas, phase-down schedules, and military-use carveouts, it failed to explain how the EPA should allocate allowances among competing businesses.

The episode also examines the practical consequences for small businesses like Choice Refrigerants, whose owner developed replacement refrigerants without the resources of major industry players. Mark, John, and Zhonette discuss how the EPA created new entrant carveouts, reshuffled market allocations, and exercised broad discretion that NCLA argues belongs to Congress—not federal agencies.

The conversation further explores broader constitutional themes raised by the case, including preemption, federalism, economic liberty, and the Supreme Court’s recent signals that it may be willing to revive meaningful limits on congressional delegation of legislative power.