'Sue and Settle' Looks to Some Like Crony Democracy. And Under Biden's Lawfaring Eco-Politics, It's Back

RealClear Investigations ^ | 2/21/24 | James Varney

[CFW]

When the Biden administration announced in 2022 that it would remove some 4 million acres of federal land in Western states from oil and gas exploration, environmental groups hailed the decision as a milestone in their fight against global warming.

“With the oil and gas industry bent on despoiling American’s public lands and fueling the climate crisis, this is a critical opportunity for the Biden administration to chart a new path toward clean energy and independence from fossil fuels,” said Jeremy Nichols, a director with WildEarth Guardians.

But Nichols could just as easily have slapped himself on the back: The administration’s move was part of a private settlement of a lawsuit filed by WildEarth and others over the objections of energy consortiums, whose efforts to intervene in the matter were dismissed.

A similar thing happened last August, when the Biden administration announced it had agreed to exclude 6 million acres of the energy-rich Gulf of Mexico seabed from exploration to settle a lawsuit brought by environmental groups, including the Sierra Club - an announcement that triggered operational delays for the industry and expensive litigation to overturn.

Administration critics say these moves reflect the resurgence of a practice embraced by the Obama administration and rejected during Donald Trump’s presidency: “sue and settle.” The tactic is simple: An advocacy group sues a federal agency for failing to enforce laws or regulations. Agency officials and the plaintiffs then come to a private agreement and that deal is ratified by the courts via a binding consent decree.

[CFW]

For decades, the left has used "sue and settle" court actions to implement policies they wouldn't be able to do otherwise. It was stopped under Trump's administration, but it appears it is back with a vengeance.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

“The tactic is simple: An advocacy group sues a federal agency for failing to enforce laws or regulations. Agency officials and the plaintiffs then come to a private agreement and that deal is ratified by the courts via a binding consent decree.”

So would that tactic work for our border?

[Secret Agent Man]

Maybe with a favorable administration.

[Liz]

Wow.....let’s get going ....that tactic would work great for our border problems:

“We get an “advocacy group” to sue a federal border patrol
agency for “failing to enforce border laws and regulations.”

The agency officials and the plaintiffs make nice....they come to a private
agreement; the deal is ratified by the courts via a binding consent decree.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Obviously, these lefty loons aren’t getting it good and hard enough yet if they’re still running their mouths and engaging in these tactics. Maybe when some of them freeze to death in the dark, they’ll wake up, but unfortunately, by then, numerous other people will be dying along with them.

[SMARTY]

With a complicit, unprincipled and corrupt ‘media’, ANYTHING and EVERYHTING is possible (and likely)!

[threefinger]

"For decades, the left has used "sue and settle" court actions to implement policies they wouldn't be able to do otherwise...."

For the million and oneth time, what America needs is Tort Reform: Loser Pays. That would put an end to much of this foolishness.

Even the formerly great British have sense enough to have Loser Pays.