Probably lol, and worst part is you know Biden would roll over and say it's out of his hands to do anything since he doesn't want to rock the boat.

The Clean Air Act was written to allow EPA to regulate new pollutants for new problems — as long as they meet a statutory threshold of endangering public health and welfare. In 2009, EPA made such a finding for six greenhouse gases. It still underpins regulations for motor vehicles and other sources of climate pollution — including the power plant rule at stake in West Virginia vs. EPA.

If the agency had to wait for Congress to act on climate change — such as might occur under the major questions doctrine — it would almost certainly still be waiting. In 2009, the House passed a major climate law for the first time, but it never received a vote in the Senate.

Hashing out the nitty-gritty of rulemakings in Congress would likely exacerbate the legislative gridlock that exists today, not lessen it, said Xan Fishman, director of energy policy and carbon management at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

“The more details you have to come to an agreement on, the harder it is to come to agreement,” he said. “And sometimes it’s easier to forge a bipartisan agreement and leave some of the details to the administration to figure out. That’s always kind of a gamble as to what the next administration is going to be, or who’s actually making those regulations. But you know, in a bipartisan deal in Congress, you just kind of live with that.”

Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act — the section of law that the West Virginia case is concerned with — runs approximately 300 words. But the final Clean Power Plan was 304 pages long, while the Trump-era replacement was 68 pages. Both are stocked with potentially controversial details that might have stymied agreement among lawmakers.

IANAL but one part of Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act is basically saying states need to submit plans which do things like establish standards of performance for existing source of air pollution in circumstances where standards don't exist already. Or something like that. There's nothing quantitative, it really is just 300 words, starting with "The EPA shall prescribe regulations..." and the article OP linked seems to imply that the SC is going to say that Congress should actually be doing the regulations, in all the gory details that agencies like the EPA does. So yeah I could definitely see how this would bring the government to a standstill by totally overloading Congress with every regulatory duty that's been delegated to every agency in the Executive.