SUPREME COURTS THROUGH THE AIRS: THE IMPACT OF TRANSNATIONAL REGULATORY STANDARDS FOR AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ON THE DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT (USA) AND THE SUPREME FEDERAL COURT (BRAZIL) IN A TIME OF POPULISM

Abstract

Background: The first half of 2022 is marked by the discussion in the area of '‹'‹constitutionality control, in the Supreme Court (United States of America) and in the Federal Supreme Court (Brazil), of actions in which the normative standards of pollution control of the country are judged against the precepts of the Constitution. Both Courts recognize the material relevance of environmental protection, the need to take a stand against the challenges of climate change and the protection of the environment as a diffuse legal claim. Objective: This paper aims to analyze, in view of the thematic similarity of the judgments produced, by homonymous Courts, the impact of transnational normative standards in debates and in the reasoning of decisions, considering that the countries in question are part of the same international legal agreements and have deep relationships marked by transnationality/globalization, including the express recognition of transnationality in previous decisions. Methodology: For the development of this research, the comparative method was used, operationalized by the operational concept techniques, bibliographic research and jurisprudential analysis. Result: The product of the comparative analysis performed allows us to classify the decision-making pattern in the case of West Virginia v. EPA completely alien to non-national law, while the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 6.148/2019, constantly mentions transnational legal links and, in the case of regulatory omission by the Brazilian State, indicates the prevalence of World Health Organization standards.