Skip to comments.U.S. appeals court rejects states' challenge over climate rules
Posted on 07/26/2013 11:36:12 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
A federal appeals court on Friday rejected a legal challenge by Texas and Wyoming to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, in a 2-1 vote, said the states and various industry groups did not have standing to sue because they could not show that they had suffered an injury or that a ruling throwing out the EPA plan would benefit them.
Texas and Wyoming objected in part to the tight deadlines the EPA imposed on them for coming up with new regulations to include greenhouse gases. The agency said in December 2010 that it would have to intervene, effectively taking over the issuing of greenhouse gas permits in the affected states, because the states had failed to act.
In Friday's decision, Judge Judith Rogers said the states had failed to show how voiding the rules in question would "redress their purported injuries."
Without the states updating their permitting programs, "construction of a major emitting facility could not proceed," Rogers said, adding that the Clean Air Act is clear that states have to issue permits "for each pollutant subject to regulation under the act."
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
The EPA web site is Bazaaro World
Great way to shatter the Union, O Federal Appeals Court Judges.
We can only hope.
So the improper and unconstitutional abuse of power by a federal agency is not injurious to a state? Oh, I can’t wait to hear what the Supreme Court says about that. In the meantime, the states should act like Obama and ignore the finding.
Is there any doubt the 17th Amendment enabled this sort of oppression by unelected agencies on the states?
It’s a shame cutting out the star below the one pictured doesn’t make a proper Texas flag, since that would be using the 28th Star, and Texas was the 28th Pleribus admitted into the Unam. (yeah, yeah - I know Flag Code specifies that no star represents any specific state - still....)
It’s “Pluribus” and “unum” you idiot!
Sorry, sorry - guess I just have less money around to read than you do...jeez; sic semper already....
The states will ultimately be proclaimed to have no standing to sue!
Thanks. You had me scratching my head there for a moment :-)
sorry. Four years of stinking Latin; and I STILL blow one of its most famous phrases. Please don’t tell the lovely Mrs. Deborah Ross
The following information has been mentioned previously in related threads concerning MAJOR constitutonal problems with the EPA and other constitutionally undefined so-called “independent federal regulatory agencies.” I’m posting this info again in case some freepers have not seen it before.
To begin with, not only have the states never delegated to Congress via the Constitution the specific power to regulate the environment, but also consider the following. The Founding States made the Constitution’s Sections 1-3 of Article I to clarify that all federal legislative powers are vested in the elected members of Congress. This means that Congress has a constitutional monopoly on federal legislative powers whether it wants it or not imo.
And by delegating federal regulatory powers to nonelected bureaucrats, Congress is not only unconstitutionally protecting the abuse of such powers from the wrath of the voters in blatant defiance of the statutes referenced above, but consider the following. Rogue federal agencies like the EPA amount to a smoke-and-mirrors way for corrupt Congress to wrongly create new powers for itself by bypassing its Article V requirement to petition the states for specific new powers via constitutional amendments imo.
Finally, I’ll shut up about judges not being able to tell the difference between the Constitution and a horse’s arse when judges start referencing specific constitutional statutes like I do to justify their decisions.
so, where was the ruling that said the epa had to prove injury when they instituted the restrictions on co2 as a toxic gas...
we need to burn it down and rebuild.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.