The EPA & the courts: The CO2 question
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled correctly that the Environmental Protection Agency -- not judges -- should lead "greenhouse gas" regulation under the Clean Air Act. But EPA's fallacious classification of carbon dioxide as a pollutant was left unaddressed.
The 8-0 decision rejected a lawsuit that sought to use public-nuisance laws to force utilities to cut CO2 emissions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, having been on the appellate panel that heard the case, didn't take part.
Given the law, the ruling could not have been otherwise. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the court: "Congress designated an expert agency here, EPA, as best suited to serve as primary regulator of greenhouse gas emissions. The expert agency is surely better equipped to do the job than individual district judges issuing ad hoc, case-by-case injunctions."
Not at issue was EPA regulating CO2 as a pollutant -- an absurd label for a substance intrinsic to nature and living creatures that stretches the Clean Air Act too far.
The anti-CO2 efforts of the Obama administration's ideologically driven, anti-growth EPA are an end run around congressional rejection of "global warming" legislation premised on junk science.
A case involving that issue can't reach the Supreme Court soon enough.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
- Police officer fatally shot in New Florence; suspect in custody
- Four downs: Steelers might still be Adams’ best bet
- Police arrest man believed to have killed officer
- Zatkoff’s, Malkin’s heroics not enough as Oilers down Penguins in shootout
- Steelers notebook: Brown downplays possible matchup against Seahawks’ Sherman
- Steelers find success vs. NFC
- Central Catholic wins 5th WPIAL football title
- Thomas Jefferson uses defense, running game to capture WPIAL title
- Aliquippa wins 16th WPIAL title, ends South Fayette’s 44-game winning streak
- Woman dies after bleeding on sidewalk outside Carrick pizzeria
- Steelers remain cautious of Seattle QB Wilson on ground, through air