The Globe and Mail reports in its Tuesday, Oct. 17, edition that the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled on the constitutionality of the federal Impact Assessment Act and found that the federal government had overstepped its bounds. The Globe's guest columnist Marla Orenstein writes that the Supreme Court said the law was largely unconstitutional -- specifically, the way the act empowered Ottawa to approve, reject and regulate resource and infrastructure projects based broadly on environmental or social impact. Significantly, the court's reference-case ruling affirmed that effects under federal jurisdiction do not include greenhouse gas emissions. In its judgment, the court stated that federal jurisdiction "does not extend to enabling the federal government to comprehensively regulate greenhouse gas emissions" and that "the inclusion of such sweeping regulatory powers in impact legislation is impermissible." This is the second round of what will be at least a three-round match between the federal and provincial governments in Canada's highest court over which order of government has the right to control actions ordinarily under provincial jurisdiction that result in GHG emissions.