Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. top court cuts back climate change regulation
Reuters ^ | June 23, 2014 | by Lawrence Hurley

Posted on 06/23/2014 7:32:14 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday issued a mixed ruling on a challenge to part of President Barack Obama’s initial wave of greenhouse gas regulations by exempting a small proportion of facilities from a federal air pollution program while allowing most major pollution sources, including power plants, to be included.

In what was a relatively narrow case concerning a challenge by industry groups and Republican-leaning states the court, divided in several different ways, held that a small proportion of industrial facilities are exempted from the single regulation in question. Most major facilities, including power plants and refineries, will still be covered.

(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: climatechange; epa; scotus

1 posted on 06/23/2014 7:32:14 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

will wonders never cease


2 posted on 06/23/2014 7:33:07 AM PDT by yldstrk ( My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Most major facilities, including power plants and refineries, will still be covered.

I guess a few, special donors will not be covered. How is this a victory?

3 posted on 06/23/2014 7:34:56 AM PDT by Ingtar (The NSA - "We're the only part of government who actually listens to the people.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
President Barack Obama’s initial wave of greenhouse gas regulations... is simply one more way to tax the air you breath while destroying more of Corporate America.
4 posted on 06/23/2014 7:35:12 AM PDT by yoe (I voted against that incompetent, lying, flip-flopping, insincere, double-talking, radical-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

He’ll just ignore it..


5 posted on 06/23/2014 7:35:27 AM PDT by rainee (Her)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

That nine judges can inflict such hardship on everyone who will have to pay Obama’s “soaring” utility bills as punishment for using fossil fuels is a travesty.

We would be better off without such a court. It is only a mouthpiece of the president, because he has the power to appoint his Leftists and to blackmail those he hasn’t appointed into acquiescing to his wishes.


6 posted on 06/23/2014 7:39:34 AM PDT by txrefugee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

Complete waste of time and energy. We need all the 50 states to tell EPA to back off, with their job destroying “RULES & REGULATIONS”. If all 50 states tell EPA, that NO, they will no they will not comply with comply with any and all the EPA job killing regulations, this will put an immediate stop to what the EPA is doing.


7 posted on 06/23/2014 7:40:34 AM PDT by gingerbread
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ingtar

That’s how the cookie crumbles these days.


8 posted on 06/23/2014 7:41:19 AM PDT by ImJustAnotherOkie (zerogottago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: gingerbread

Jerks at the EPA ought to go tour Russia, Peru, China if they want to see dirty filthy and contaminated

US is clean


9 posted on 06/23/2014 7:42:28 AM PDT by yldstrk ( My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

Actually they didn’t do much of anything. The EPA wanted to control 86% of greenhouse gasses and the SCOTUS ruled to let them control 83%. So basically the Supreme Court is worthless.


10 posted on 06/23/2014 7:44:09 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose o f a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rainee

& not sure this big win, more like a loss..says it limits from 86% to 83%. EPA still getting what it wants, just 3% less. What a joke.


11 posted on 06/23/2014 7:45:19 AM PDT by rainee (Her)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2

gads


12 posted on 06/23/2014 7:45:38 AM PDT by yldstrk ( My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rainee

3% is better than nothing , but you also know the EPA and Obama will now go into overdrive


13 posted on 06/23/2014 7:48:57 AM PDT by molson209 (Blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson