Based on the EPA's "endangerment findings", yes. Those same "endangerment findings" are part of what is being challenged in this case. It has been grinding through the system since Feb, 2010.
Incorrect, the second paragraph points out the determination that CO2 endangered was made in 2009. EPA did not have authority to determine endangerment until after the SCOTUS decision.
Also, it should be pointed out that the 2007 SCOTUS decision was re-enforced by a second SCOTUS decision in 2011.
In that second case, 7 states and the City of New York had sued a group of power companies saying that the power companies CO2 emmissions were a "nuisance" which gave these states and NYC authority to regulate those CO2 emissions.
SCOTUS ruled against those 7 state and NYC saying only the feds via EPA had the authority to regulate CO2, thus enforcing the 2007 decision.
As has been pointed out numerous times since 2009, the best chance to defeat this is in #3 killing the tailoring rule. The premise is that EPA doesn't have the authority to "tailor the regulation'. Only Congress has that authority.
If they can kill the tailoring rule that would force EPA to regulate not only large emitters but many, many small emitters like churches and office buildings with a gas fired central heating units, farmers with diesel powered equipment, body shops, commercial laundrys, bakeries, and uncountable other small business.
Its one thing to go after the large emmitters but it is not politically and economically feasibe to go after small business.