Question: Which court case overturned more previous decisions, Ableman v. Booth or Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency?

Context articles: American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency
Michigan v. EPA
Özel Çevre Koruma Kurumu
James Strock
Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency
Ableman v. Booth
List of Superfund sites in West Virginia
Entergy Corp. v. Riverkeeper Inc.
Criminal law in the Taney Court

American Electric Power Company v. Connecticut, 564 U.S. 410 (2011) , was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court, in an 8–0 decision, held that corporations cannot be sued for greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) under federal common law, primarily because the Clean Air Act (CAA) delegates the management of carbon dioxide and other GHG emissions to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
 Brought to court in July 2004 in the Southern District of New York, this was the first global warming case based on a public nuisance claim.
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S. 497 (2007), is a 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court case in which twelve states and several cities of the United States brought suit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to force that federal agency to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) as pollutants.
Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency, 576 U.S. ___ (2015) , was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court analyzed whether the Environmental Protection Agency must consider costs when deciding to regulate, rather than later in the process of issuing the regulation.
 Writing for a 5–4 majority, Justice Antonin Scalia held that the EPA must consider costs and that it interpreted the Clean Air Act unreasonably when it determined that it did not need to consider costs when it issued a "finding" that it was "necessary and appropriate" to regulate.
 Critics of the Environmental Protection Agency praised the Court's decision, while other commentators criticized Justice Scalia's decision to ignore health impacts in his opinion.
 Some commentators suggested that the decision may derail President Barack Obama's climate change agenda entirely.
The Özel Çevre Koruma Kurumu (English: Special Environmental Protection Agency ), is the Turkish authority for protecting Special Protection Areas.
 It was established in 1988 by a decree of the Turkish Cabinet and initially placed under direct supervision of the prime minister.
 In English it may be referred to as EPASA, short for Environmental Protection Agency for Special Areas.
James Strock (born August 19, 1956) is an American entrepreneur, author, speaker, and former senior-level public official.
 He is the author of three books on leadership, and a fourth on political reform in the United States.
 Based in Scottsdale, Arizona and Rancho Santa Fe, California, he is a frequent speaker at conferences and corporate events across the U.S. and in other nations.
 Strock previously served as the founding Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency, and as Assistant Administrator for Enforcement (chief law enforcement officer) of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Sackett v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 566 U.S. ___ (2012) , is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Clean Water Act is subject to the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires an appeals process for any ruling by a federal agency.
 The Court ruled that the availability of immediate judicial review of compliance orders issued by the United States Environmental Protection Agency is required.
Ableman v. Booth, 62 U.S. 506 (1859) , was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that State courts cannot issue rulings on federal law that contradict the decisions of federal courts, overturning a decision by the Supreme Court of Wisconsin.
 The Supreme Court held that under the Constitution, the federal courts have the final power to decide cases arising under the Constitution and federal statutes, and that the States do not have the power to overturn those decisions.
 Thus, Wisconsin did not have the authority to nullify federal judgments or statutes.
This is a list of Superfund sites in West Virginia designated under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) environmental law.
 The CERCLA federal law of 1980 authorized the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to create a list of polluted locations requiring a long-term response to clean up hazardous material contamination.
 These locations are known as Superfund sites, and are placed on the National Priorities List (NPL).
 The NPL guides the Environmental Protection Agency in "determining which sites warrant further investigation" for environmental remediation.
 As of March 26, 2010, there were 9 Superfund sites on the National Priorities List in West Virginia.
 No additional sites are currently proposed for entry on the list.
 Two sites have been cleaned up and removed from the list.
Entergy v. Riverkeeper, 556 U.S. 208 (2009), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court that reviewed the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) interpretation of the Clean Water Act regulations with regard to cooling water intakes for power plants.
 Existing facilities are mandated to use the "Best Technology Available" to "minimize the adverse environmental impact."
 The importance of this case is whether the agency may use a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) in choosing the Best Technology Available also known in the industry as Best Available Technology or (BAT) to meet the National performance standards (NPS).
 Reversing a lower court opinion, in a 5 - 1 - 3 ruling the court decided to uphold EPA's decision as reasonable to allow CBA when determining BAT to maintain national environmental standards.
The Taney Court (1836–1864) heard thirty criminal law cases, approximately one per year.
 Notable cases include "Prigg v. Pennsylvania" (1842), "United States v. Rogers" (1846), "Ableman v. Booth" (1858), "Ex parte Vallandigham" (1861), and "United States v. Jackalow" (1862).