Even if contested, the CP pushes the courts to accept it.
Weatherholtz ’18 [Tiffany; Executive Articles Editor at the Emory International Law Review, J.D. Candidate at Emory University School of Law and B.A. from the University of Georgia; Emory International Law Review, “Separating Controversy and Climate Change: How the United States Could Lead Climate Change and Energy Reform with The Growth of Renewable Energy Sources Globally,” vol. 32]
Otherwise, without authorization, to conform with the proposed solution, states will push uncooperative federalism. "Uncooperative federalism occurs when … states implementing federal environmental law use that power to push federal authorities to take a new position" and generally, in practice, when "states use their power as federal servants to resist, challenge, and even dissent from federal policy." Although the Supreme Court consistently condemns commandeering and favors preemption, proponents of uncooperative federalism insist that the Court is wrong and "would push the Court to tolerate a degree of conflict between such laws and their federal counterparts" along with "greater federal-state integration." Therefore, although the Supreme Court has not yet approved this theory, uncooperative federalism provides a way for states to continue to push the proposed solution to increase renewable energy sources.