Skip to comments.Justices limit existing EPA global warming rules
Posted on 06/23/2014 7:39:23 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
WASHINGTON The Supreme Court on Monday placed limits on the sole Obama administration program already in place to deal with power plant and factory emissions of gases blamed for global warming.
The justices said that the Environmental Protection Agency lacks authority in some cases to force companies to evaluate ways to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. This rule applies when a company needs a permit to expand facilities or build new ones that would increase overall pollution. Carbon dioxide is the chief gas linked to global warming.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The Supreme Court is just as worthless as the rest of our government.
The EPA lacks authority to enact law. Regulations are rules that come with penalties. Sounds like laws to me. Laws are the job of the legislative branch.
We should have abolished the SCOTUS during the Warren Court. Think how much better off we would be.
It looks like Americans are going to have to continue fighting the EPA to get them off of our backs. The Bill of Rights and the Constitution just aren’t working since the Obama regime came to power.
And I hope you would have had a revolution at hand and some sort of supra-martial law.
A bad court is usually still better than no court.
Don’t point at the court; point at the entities named at the top of the Constitution. Riiiiight, We The People.
They had called God into their situation at the founding, and the result was good although still flawed (chattel slavery anyone?).
Without continuing to do this, the country was bound to lapse into more and more evil.
What’s that mean?
Court decisions also carry the force of law.
In this particular case, both Bush and Obama wanted Congress to pre-empt by enacting legislation. Congress tried to pass cap and trade in 2009 but failed. In 2010 the Senate tried a scaled back version but that also failed.
“Carbon dioxide is the chief gas linked to global warming.”
Is this an editorial or is it news?
The Declaration of Independence and Constitution were written with the PRESUMPTION OF LIBERTY that is the inalienable right of each citizen
Government acts with the presumption of total power over each citizen. It is easy for one branch of government to give itself other branches permission to expand or maintain their power. It is difficult, indeed a conflict of interest, for one branch to reign in the power of another branch. This is made even more difficult when a common, power-oriented, ideology pervades members of each branch.
The primary limit on government power is the limited money it can spend. When government gives itself power to create near-infinite amounts of money through an “independent” central bank, then there is very little to limit near-infinite amounts of government in all forms, particularly the groups that it will give subsidies to and the bureaucrats it will employ.
Both constituencies will make their own unique demands on government.
Every day more people are coming to the judgment that a carefully organized effort to repair the constitution via the States’ power to propose and ratify amendments has less risk to our liberty and prosperity than the present trajectory of the federal government and especially the federal bureaucracy.
The first order of business of an Article V Convention must be to limit government’s ability to spend and create near-infinite amounts of money.
[ The Supreme Court is just as worthless as the rest of our government. ]
It would be far better if it would have term limits and also if the states had a RECOURSE against some of their crazier rulings..
Hint, Hint Hint.....
...Cough... Liberty Amendments... cough Cough...
Also how do we not know that certain memebers of the court are not being blackmailed by some of the more unscrupulous members of the espionage beer-o-cracy....????
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Is this not a good ruling by putting restrictions on the EPA? What am I missing, beside the ruling not including all companies?
It seems to me that the EPA has lost very little of its power to strangle Americans’ freedom. The entire idea that CO2 is a pollutant is erroneous and fraudulent. Yet, this absurd theory stands. Bob
“We should have abolished the SCOTUS during the Warren Court. Think how much better off we would be.”
Indeed if you want justice and constitutional law, you can’t depend upon the employees of the criminals to uphold it, less that ‘law’ becomes a weapon of assault against the people rather than the chains of restraint for the state.
SCOTUS exercises an heavy biased hand anytime it try’s to resolve a federal Constitutional question. As it is always reliably the hand picked member of one of the disputing parties.
If you expect to uphold any law, an impartial 3rd party must always weigh in over the dispute, SCOTUS being one of 3 branches of the Federal Government has always favored itself in disputes, and is not a legitimate arbitrator in such disputes.
If there is to be justice, then the only party capable of resolving such disputes over a Constitution are the very parties that created and empowered that constitution in the first place. If there is to be a court, its members must be directly selected by the States. Perhaps in accordance to their respective judicial philosophic. Furthermore such a court recognizing the people and theirs states as the origins of all legitimate power must do the utomost to respect their local ability to govern.
“The entire idea that CO2 is a pollutant is erroneous and fraudulent.”
Yes, that is true but they actually seem to have some clowns convinced that the current CO2 level is very close to the point of killing people. Can you imagine that?
Carbon dioxide is the chief gas linked to global warming.
Is this an editorial or is it news?
Yeah. Even if you accept the warmers’ arguments...it’s still water vapor. ...and if you don’t, it’s water vapor.
The Constitution does not authorize Congress to delegate its legislative authority away.
Respectfully, you are a little late to the party. The Administrative Procedures Act is a legacy of the Roosevelt Administration. The act has withstood various tests in the Supreme Court. I am quite familiar with its implementation while on the receiving end of Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations affecting the commercial nuclear power plants I have worked at.
But what the SCOTUS ruels on today is nothing but corporate law - and those laws are written with the PRESUMPTION OF SLAVERY.
Not "metaphorical" slavery. Real, actual, the-government-owns-your-existence slavery. THAT is the actual, legal presumption of corporate law, regarding the relationship between the government and any corporation.
Amd that's why corporate "rights" are the biggest lie on the planet. "Corporate rights" is actually a 'term-of-art' that means the PRIVILEGES granted to corporations by the government, for the benefit of the government alone.
So you can see why, if this complete reversal of the original Constitution and the Declaration of Independence were, for example, to be presumed upon non-corporate human beings, it would... cause problems.
Welcome to our world.
I'm not sure. It isn't science.
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.