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

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court Orders EPA to Consider Global Warming Regulations

Posted on 04/02/2007 7:14:51 AM PDT by Ragnar Danneskjold

Ruling just being released...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: globalwarming; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

1 posted on 04/02/2007 7:14:57 AM PDT by Ragnar Danneskjold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

What a load of crap.


2 posted on 04/02/2007 7:17:31 AM PDT by #1CTYankee (That's right, I have no proof. So what of it??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

H.A.A.R.P. says it all...


3 posted on 04/02/2007 7:18:10 AM PDT by 100-Fold_Return (The Lord Talks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

EPA reply's: Okay we considered them and found them to be stupid so thank you very much.


4 posted on 04/02/2007 7:18:29 AM PDT by stockpirate (You want real conservatives to show up at the polls this time, run real conservatives!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

If this isn't a late April fool's day joke, then I don't understand why people actually think the Supreme Court will actually overturn Roe v Wade. We might wish they would do so, but it's highly unlikely. Something happens to people when they get to DC and whatever that something is, it's not good.


5 posted on 04/02/2007 7:19:33 AM PDT by Peach (The Clintons' pardoned more terrorists than they captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

The best way to save the planet is to pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting Congress from passing any law designed to change earth's climate.

If you like government controlled economies, wait'll they start trying to control the weather.


6 posted on 04/02/2007 7:20:04 AM PDT by Maceman (This is America. Why must we press "1" for English?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

Ruling was 5-4 that the EPA did not take into account proper considerations in 2003 when it decided not to order reductions in emissions from new automobiles.


7 posted on 04/02/2007 7:20:05 AM PDT by Ragnar Danneskjold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

Where do they get off on this!? Our supreme court is a disgrace. What was the vote, does anybody know?


8 posted on 04/02/2007 7:21:23 AM PDT by southernindymom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

And the five USSC justices, of course, know what are "proper" considerations when it comes to geophysical science.


9 posted on 04/02/2007 7:22:03 AM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of News)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

What a shame they didn't rule to dissolve the EPA altogether.


10 posted on 04/02/2007 7:23:27 AM PDT by Gabz (I like mine with lettuce and tomato, heinz57 and french-fried potatoes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold
I wonder if this will have the effect of sandbagging the EPA on the global warming junk science?

Sort of forcing them to produce some "science."

11 posted on 04/02/2007 7:24:37 AM PDT by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

So now the damn Supreme Court is taking on global warming? Where is that in the Constitution? God Help Us!


12 posted on 04/02/2007 7:30:58 AM PDT by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

Supreme Court also ruled that a previously barred lawsuit to allow the federal government to force emission reductions at 8 Duke Energy coal power plants can proceed.


13 posted on 04/02/2007 7:31:01 AM PDT by Ragnar Danneskjold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

I figured it was something like this.


14 posted on 04/02/2007 7:37:56 AM PDT by AmishDude (It doesn't matter whom you vote for. It matters who takes office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold
JUSTICE SCALIA: "Mr. Milkey, I had -- my problem is precisely on the impermissible grounds. To be sure, carbon dioxide is a pollutant, and it can be an air pollutant. If we fill this room with carbon dioxide, it could be an air pollutant that endangers health. But I always thought an air pollutant was something different from a stratospheric pollutant, and your claim here is not that the pollution of what we normally call 'air' is endangering health. That isn't, that isn't -- your assertion is that after the pollutant leaves the air and goes up into the stratosphere it is contributing to global warming."

MR. MILKEY: "Respectfully, Your Honor, it is not the stratosphere. It's the troposphere.

JUSTICE SCALIA: "Troposphere, whatever. I told you before I'm not a scientist."

(Laughter.)

JUSTICE SCALIA: "That's why I don't want to have to deal with global warming, to tell you the truth."

15 posted on 04/02/2007 7:40:45 AM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

Supreme Court rules against Duke Energy
By PETE YOST
Associated Press Writer
Related Content
Supreme Court

WASHINGTON --The Supreme Court gave a boost Monday to a federal clean air initiative aimed at forcing utilities to install pollution control equipment on aging coal-fired power plants.

In a unanimous decision, the justices ruled against Duke Energy Corp. in a lawsuit brought by the Clinton administration, part of a massive enforcement effort targeting more than a dozen utilities.

The justices ruled that the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., overstepped its authority by implicitly invalidating Environmental Protection Agency regulations in a way that favored Duke. The case now returns to the lower courts.

The enforcement program is aimed at reducing power plant emissions of nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide that contribute to smog and acid rain. Sulfur dioxide is the leading cause of acid rain.


16 posted on 04/02/2007 7:50:41 AM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

Supremes may have lost it.......


17 posted on 04/02/2007 7:51:14 AM PDT by yldstrk (My heros have always been cowboys--Reagan and Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold

We have gone over the edge.


18 posted on 04/02/2007 7:51:51 AM PDT by unixfox (The 13th Amendment Abolished Slavery, The 16th Amendment Reinstated It !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragnar Danneskjold
The opinion is not up yet. Case is Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corp.. Transcript is here.

Keep checking here for the opinion.

19 posted on 04/02/2007 8:01:31 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

The verdict is in. We're GUILTY. CO2 has been ruled as a pollutant, and since we all exhale, we are criminals. Each household shall now be taxed accordingly by number of persons in it.


20 posted on 04/02/2007 8:20:46 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

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