The Wall Street Journal challenges New York Times reporting on the Supreme Court's 2016 decision regarding Obama's Clean Power Plan. The opinion piece argues the Court's stay was judicious, not rushed as the Times suggested. Leaked memos cited by the Times actually confirm the decision's expedited nature was appropriate when considering executive overreach.

Federal courts typically deliberate extensively, sometimes taking years to review evidence and briefs. The author contends the Clean Power Plan case warranted swift judicial intervention to prevent potential harm during ongoing litigation. The Supreme Court's decision followed established precedent for emergency stays in regulatory challenges.

The opinion piece directly contradicts the Times narrative, suggesting the publication misrepresented the circumstances of the Court's action. By publishing internal documents never intended for public consumption, the Times may have misled readers about the judicial process's appropriate pace in regulatory matters.