In early June, a panel of judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia threw out challenges to the Environmental Protection Agency’s plan to shut down even more coal-fired power plants. Judges ruled it was premature to hear the cases – because they were in objection to the EPA’s proposal. Until it was implemented, the courts had no jurisdiction, the ruling stated.

On Monday, the White House announced the plan is being implemented.

In truth, the rules have been more than a proposal for some time. Scores of coal-fired power plant units have been shut down because utility executives knew full well there was no way the EPA would not proceed with its “proposal.”

There was a practical reason behind what the White House did, of course. It took months for the cases decided in June to wend their ways through the court system to the appeals panel, only to be rejected. Once the rules were finalized, a whole new round of challenges would have to be handled – and in the interim, even more coal-fired power plants could be closed.

But on July 24, 14 states filed a petition asking the appeals court to reconsider its June decision.

The appeals court judges certainly ought to feel deceived by the EPA and the White House. Again, even as government lawyers were arguing prior to the June ruling that the lawsuits were premature, the agency’s officials knew that within eight weeks, the new standards would be finalized.

That knowledge ought to prompt the appeals court to cut through the red tape and hear the 14-state petition at the earliest possible date. The courts already have allowed the EPA to do too much damage – and now is the time to rectify that.