Climate change Court casts doubt on states global warming suit Electric cars
April 19, 2011 1:29 PM ET More Liberal lies don't fall for it !
WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. Supreme Court appeared deeply skeptical Tuesday about allowing states to sue electric utilities to force cuts in greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.
Both conservative and liberal justices questioned whether a federal judge could deal with the complex issue of global warming, a topic they suggested is better left to Congress and the federal Environmental Protection Agency.
The court heard argument over whether to end the lawsuit by six states, New York City and three conservation groups against four private companies and the federal Tennessee Valley Authority, the five largest emitters of carbon dioxide in the United States.
V V V V V
The Obama administration has joined with the companies in asking the high court to throw out the lawsuit.
V V V V V V V V
The administration says EPA already is considering setting emission standards that would accomplish what the states are seeking.
Why let the lawsuit go forward, when "the agency is engaged in it right now?" said Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The lawyer representing the states acknowledged that the case was before the high court at a "peculiar moment," but said the court should block the lawsuit only if the EPA actually issues regulations.
No statute or rule "currently regulates the emissions of existing power plants," said Barbara Underwood, the New York state solicitor general. Underwood said the plants operated by the companies and the TVA account for 10 percent of all carbon dioxide emitted annually in the U.S.
"This court should not close the courthouse door at the outset," Underwood said.
Lawyers for the companies and the administration focused on the enormity of the climate change issue to argue against the lawsuit.
"You have never heard a case like this before," Neal Katyal, the acting U.S. Solicitor General, said. The term global warming, Katyal said, "tells you all you need to know."
The case is the second climate change dispute at the court in four years. In 2007, the court declared that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are air pollutants under the federal Clean Air Act. By a 5-4 vote, the justices said the EPA has the authority to regulate those emissions from new cars and trucks under that landmark law. The same reasoning applies to power plants.
Ginsburg was among the justices in the majority in 2007. Two others in that majority, Justices Stephen Breyer and Anthony Kennedy, also expressed doubts about the states' case Tuesday.
liberal LIES...Breyer questioned whether a judge even would have the authority to issue the kind of order the states want. ....liberal LIES
http://money.msn.com/business-news/article.aspx?feed=AP&date=20110419&...
"liberal justices MY ASS"
161 views. nuff said...you are a moron.
chewbaccajoe 10 months ago
@chewbaccajoe Subscribers:1,249... Nuff said !
TheGuyFromZhills 10 months ago
The Government won't let us drill, won't let us build more refineries, never allow a new nuclear plant, and crapping on the coal fire plants! Just where the hell are we all supposed to get electricity from? Magic fairies?! Oh! I know! Lets build a wind turbine and harness the energy of the hot gas billowing out of the oval office!
Seriously, we need to drop the moritorium on American oil drilling and about 5 new nuke power plants would go along way to fixing alot of problems. OBlama, kiss my...
ARMOROID5000 10 months ago
@ARMOROID5000 wind turbine and harness the energy of the hot gas billowing out of the oval office! HA HA LOL Awesome ! Priceless "hot gas billowing out of the oval office"
TheGuyFromZhills 10 months ago
You're one of my fav's on YT!
MsMilkytheclown 10 months ago
@MsMilkytheclown Thanks :-)
TheGuyFromZhills 10 months ago