Letters by a modern St. Ferdinand III about cults

Back Printer Friendly Version

Monday, April 25, 2011

The courts reject Eco-authoritarianism.

Another colossal defeat for the Warm-mongers.

by StFerdIII

GlobaloneyWarming Mongers suffer yet another defeat – at the hands of Liberal Judges. Not even Marxist jurists can stomach the infantile delusions of this cult. The autocratic Obama-EPA cabal wanted a court decision to allow Legal activists to shut down power supply and have the government, through the legal process, reduce 'carbon emissions' by fiat. In other words destroy the supply of power through court action which punishes the dirty-peasantry, reduces economic growth and eradicates jobs. Very clever. But the Eco-terrorists and their Obama allies lost this one. Another smashing loss for the eco-cult.

In American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut, a group of state attorneys general are suing five utilities, claiming their carbon emissions are a "nuisance" under common law. Boiled down, they're asking the Court to give judges the power to create climate policies—and weigh their costs and benefits—that would ordinarily be fashioned by the politically accountable branches.

.....Later, Justice Kagan, President Obama's second nominee to the High Court, asked, "General, do you think that you have a federal common law cause of action against anybody in the world?" After all, everyone contributes to global warming. "Obviously the greatest benefit to reduce global warming would be, of course, to shut down the power plants, right?" as Chief Justice John Roberts put it. Should the courts have that power too—but extended over the entire economy?

Or "can the courts set a tax?" wondered Stephen Breyer. Ms. Underwood claimed that such a policy wouldn't "abate the nuisance," ...

It's heartening to see the Justices reaffirm their faith in the democratic process, especially after a 2006 case that the Obama Administration has used to justify its autocratic choice to impose carbon regulation via the Environmental Protection Agency. But even the proponents of the climate tort have been open about their bad faith. The point of this and other lawsuits has merely been to harass industry and coerce business into supporting a carbon crackdown, no matter what elected representatives decide.

While the Court could dismiss the judicial encroachment of the climate tort in a number of ways, the good news for the economy is that it appears to be toast.

The whole point of this episode was to give government an unfettered 'right' to raise taxes and fees in order to 'save' little Mother Earth. Climate-baloney has never been about saving the Earth Mother. It is about raising revenues and controlling our lives. It is about balancing bankrupted government budgets with an endless stream of expropriated private property.

The world has cooled in the past 10 years. Co2 has nothing to do with climate. Note to the judges – GlobaloneyWarming today is about as relevant as GlobaloneyCooling was in the 1970s and 80s. Maybe the activist Left can explain to us knuckle-dragging deniers exactly how Co2 caused the ending of the last ice age? Or why there was a medieval little-ice age? [Oh that is why they invented the 'hockey stick' curve which wipes out the medieval ice age and institutes fantasy, in the place of climate reality. Now that is real science!].