[justshutupandtakeit]

States have the right to impose more stringent controls on pollution than the feds require but not less this has been long established. It is surprising to find this before the Court at all. Environmental laws would be thrown out the window should the rules be different as states would compete in a race to the bottom to lower standards more than their neighbors.

That would also be tantamount to saying the federal government has no legitimate power to legislate environmental laws.

[sergeantdave]

The federal government has the power to legislate environmental law - the power of the gun. But it's not legitimate.

Pollution problems should be addressed by those affected by pollution. If a person is affected by pollution, he needs to go to a civil court and file a trespass complaint. In the court he can present evidence that the pollution is trespassing on his property, causing harm, and he can get a cease and desist order and monetary damages. Or he could sign a contract with the polluter allowing the trespass for a sum of money.

In this case, the EPA presented itself as the aggrieved party without presenting proof that the trespass caused anyone harm. It simply said the industry is not following our petty rules and it must. The fascists on the SC agreed.

None of this is "legitimate."

[Old Professer]

Boy, you surely live up to your screen name, don't you?

[oceanview]

actually, it should be a level playing field. if some kooks in california mandate higher pollution controls that would essentially either wreck the auto industry, or mean that no new cars could be sold in CA, the EPA ought to be able to stop that also.

I am not sure where that stands, but given this ruling, I see no reason why the EPA couldn't toss the "california" auto emission rules.

[AAABEST]

Figures you'd take the communist point of view, as usual.

These out of control agencies are anything but constitutional or American. They're full of agenda driven hacks that invent hair brained junk science "rules" which have enormous impact on communities. These "ministers" have way more power than any prince did during the middle ages for crying out loud.

The people affected have no redress, no check and balances,nobody to un-elect and no democratic process with which to stop them. Agencies like the EPA and FWS to name 2 are plundering autonomous machines. Then the little pinkos amongst us justify it.

I'll be sure to put you in the leftist Ginsburg/O'conner pinko cabal and treat your posts as such from now on

[Sandy]

It is surprising to find this before the Court at all. Environmental laws would be thrown out the window should the rules be different as states would compete in a race to the bottom to lower standards more than their neighbors. That would also be tantamount to saying the federal government has no legitimate power to legislate environmental laws.

You really have no idea what you're talking about. The Clean Air Act specifically gives the states the authority and discretion to determine BACT for any particular source, with the the states of course being required to follow the standards promulgated by the EPA. Duh, nobody in this case was arguing in favor of your "race to the bottom" bogeyman; it wasn't even at issue. The state's decision complied 100% with EPA standards.

[Lurker]

They don't.

L