Supreme Court indicates it will dismiss major climate-change case

The Hill ^ | April 19, 2011 | by Andrew Restuccia

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

The president doesn’t have final authority over the EPA. If he tried to exercise that kind of authority, expect talk of “impeachment” next. The same laws that prevent “spoils system” politics protect career bureaucrats.

Who do you think named Lisa Jackson as EPA administrator? The deputy administrator? Craig E. Hooks? etc. etc. etc.

The POTUS doesn't usually have to micro-manage agencies. Obama just named a bunch of green commies to run the cabinet agencies, and a bunch of czars with similar ideology.

They tried to impeach Bill Clinton. but not for firing 80 US attorneys in his first year.

[yup2394871293]

The POTUS doesn't usually have to micro-manage agencies.

The next POTUS will have to. These policies won't end with Obama. Much of what Obama has been doing in office is extending Bush policies. And people like Lisa Jackson didn't just come from an apartment above a Greenwich Village coffee house. She was with the EPA 16 years alone and has been a environmental bureaucrat much longer than that. But I'm sure no political agenda rubbed off on her during her years as a GS-somethingorother. Not at all. The teleprompter in chief is making all the decisions, yeah.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

Much of what Obama has been doing in office is extending Bush policies.

You got that right! We don't need another GWB, and we need to ask GOP candidates for POTUS specific questions about the EPA and other expensive and overreaching bureaucracies, but also about amnesty.

I think that "clean air" and "clean water" are legitimate issues. In fact, in my life I used to live in a neighborhood that had truly dirty air, such that when I went outside at night it was hard to breathe. But CO2 as a pollutant? Preposterous.

[hsalaw]

Here’s the plan: the Supreme Court rules that the EPA controls, and then Congress (in 2013) defunds and disbands the EPA. Yay! Game over.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

She was with the EPA 16 years alone and has been a environmental bureaucrat much longer than that. But I'm sure no political agenda rubbed off on her during her years as a GS-somethingorother. Not at all. The teleprompter in chief is making all the decisions, yeah.

Jackson and Obama really have the same ideology. When the senate refused to pass crap and trade, Jackson said they had better pass it, or she would move ahead with "command and control" regulation.

I suppose working in the EPA so long is not necessarily a disqualifying factor, but Obama seems to pick the most radical leftists every time he gets a chance. And Steven Chu seems worse than Jackson.

EPA Boss to Speak at Youth Climate Conference With Van Jones and International Socialists

EPA is in desperate need of reform, and that won't happen unless we insist, and maybe not even then.

[Monorprise]

Never really understood the legitimacy of Federal Common law.

[caww]

Climate change is a global issue that must be addressed on a broad scale, Katyal argued.

No it isn't. And lets call it what it is "Global Warming", but of course that wasn't working so let's just chnge the term and we'll change the equation. That's not working either....NEXT.

[eak3]

Why do we keep talking & bitching. The time has well past for that revolution.

Problem is A: when it comes to these kind of things we dont know how exactly something like that just happens and B:we're bitching and complaining behind the comforts of hot cocoa on a soft couch behind a computer monitor

[DAC21]

Basically the courts are saying they do not want to second guess the ‘experts’..................

Well is that the opening we need to go after, litigating that that the “experts” knowingly generated fraudulent date to support there case?

[Puddleglum]

I guess we need Congress to repeal the stupid laws they pass and be more temperate when passing laws in the future. Hah. They are us (or, really, they are the sum of their campaign contributions).

[bert]

The plaintiff’s must pay for the court’s time and the defendant’s time and legal bills

[NCBraveheart]

tar & feathers

[DAC21]

Basically the courts are saying they do not want to second guess the ‘experts’..................

Well is that the opening we need to go after, litigating that that the “experts” knowingly generated fraudulent date to support there case?

[Red Badger]

You have to prove that they ‘knowingly’ generated fraud, and the data they used was ‘knowingly’ false when they used it. Then you have to get to the source of their data, and the source of their data, and the source of their data. It is an intricate can of Gordian worms.

No, the courts are not the answer in this instance. We have to get control of Congress and the Presidency. Then we can limit the EPA’s mission to ordinary pollution, not ‘maybe’ pollution in a 100 years...........

[juno67]

Hard to say if we lost or won. Very difficult and confusing case. The Supreme Court thought about it for a while and decided to punt.

[palmer]

This lawsuit, if allowed to continue, would have established that individual States can sue "carbon emitters" (i.e. energy production) in other States based upon a rather dubious claim of harm to the citizens of their State.

Sounds about right. Commentors on this thread above you seem to think that this gives more power to the EPA, but that is an entirely different problem. We certainly do not want Massachusetts dictating how we produce power in Virginia.

[palmer]

Fukushima is only the latest in a long history of corporate/government mismanagement with global consequences. Experts claiming to show the benefits and safety of their advice continuously bombard us. Yet, our planet has now endured multiple nuclear meltdowns, oil spills, fracking-induced earthquakes,

That's a bunch of crap. Despite two Chernobyl level accidents, nuclear is still relatively safe and fossil fuels add much more value than harm. If you have other ideas for how to obtain energy, please share them.

[palmer]

`precedent' being set by the SCOTUS in deferring to the `experts' of the EPA

Not relevant. The choice was letting 'scientists' in liberal states decide that generating power in other states harms mother earth or having the feds step in. In this case the feds are the lesser of two evils.

[AuH2ORepublican]

“I am confused by the responses here.”

---

Only because you assume that the posters read past that first Ginsburg quote.

“This lawsuit, if allowed to continue, would have established that individual States can sue “carbon emitters” (i.e. energy production) in other States based upon a rather dubious claim of harm to the citizens of their State.

Striking down this case is the right thing to do.”

---

You are 100% correct, but you “cheated” by actually reading the article and thinking things through instead of reflexively spouting off on how the Supreme Court is corrupt.

[allmendream]

“Only because you assume that the posters read past that first Ginsburg quote.” AuH2ORepublican

NOT a safe assumption! LOL!

Thanks for the support!