Do Feds Or Activists Decide Climate Law?

While Sup Ct had ruled FEDERAL law trumps state law when regulating pollution across state lines, progressive appellate courts recently confused the issue. With sky-high stakes involved, time for Justices to intervene again?

As the Fox News op ed noted: “For over a century, the Supreme Court has held that lawsuits over air & water pollution that crosses state lines must be decided under federal law. This means overreaching states & cities cannot impose their environmental agendas on their neighbors or otherwise hijack the domain of federal environmental law, federal regulations & international treaties.” The Justices unanimously extended this rule in the 2011 case, American Electric Power v Connecticut, in which eight states, NYC & others tried to compel certain power companies to abate their greenhouse-gas emissions. Even Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had agreed with President Obama’s EPA that it was solely given the power by Congress to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions. But, the progressives would have none of it.

Instead, they filed hundreds of new lawsuits in progressive-minded courtrooms across the country demanding billions of dollars for alleged damages due to CLIMATE CHANGE and under subsequently-enacted state laws supposedly enabling them. The 2nd Circuit nixed the creative legal gambit, while the 1st, 4th & 10 Circuits saw no problem with such state laws being applied to that elusive term, climate change, especially when it comes to suing deep-pocketed energy companies. The so-called “split” between the circuits means that the US Supreme Court now has a chance to jump back into the muddied waters. How can it ignore it? Do the Magnificent 9 want California & its Gov. Moonbeam 2.0 calling the shots from here on out?

Davd Soul