Home | Community | Message Board

Mycohaus
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Kraken Kratom Shop: Kratom Capsules for Sale

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
InvisibleCymbal
Kill your idol
Registered: 06/29/22
Posts: 76
Supreme Court Says Fed Can’t Regulate 4 Clean Air & Water
    #27843556 - 06/30/22 08:41 AM (1 year, 10 months ago)

The Supreme Court Just Fucked the Planet

By Molly Taft

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday in West Virginia vs. EPA in favor of plaintiffs who argued that the Environmental Protection Agency does not have the power to regulate carbon dioxide from power plants—the country’s second-largest source of CO2 emissions—without input from Congress.

The ruling almost completely disrupts any major plans to fight climate change at the federal level in the U.S., and is likely to have wide-ranging implications for federal agencies looking to protect public health under bedrock laws like the Clean Air Act. It also signals how the court is likely to rule in other environmentally damaging cases in the pipeline.

The vote was 6 to 3, with the court’s three liberal members in dissent. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, said that Congress had not explicitly given the EPA the authority to regulate emissions as it designed the Clean Power Plan to do.

“There is little question that the petitioner States are injured, since the rule requires them to more stringently regulate power plant emissions within their borders,” Roberts wrote in the opinion.

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Elena Kagan wrote that the court’s decision “strips the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the power Congress gave it to respond to ‘the most pressing environmental challenge of our time.’”

The court’s decision follows a series of major policy reversals, including a devastating rollback on abortion rights, by one of the most conservative Supreme Courts in history, created by a dark-money network powered by pro-polluter interests. And it isn’t done wreaking havoc on public health just yet.

What is West Virginia vs. EPA?

This case is a strange one for a lot of reasons, and it’s been a winding road of confusing legal moves to get to today’s catastrophic decision. The host of plaintiffs, which include several attorneys general from Republican states and two coal companies, essentially brought a preemptive case against the Biden administration’s EPA as it worked on its own rule to replace the Obama administration’s 2015 Clean Power Plan.

The Clean Power Plan, which proposed to reduce emissions from the power sector by setting reduction targets that states would have needed to meet, never actually went into effect; it was tied up in conservative court challenges for years (including one led by West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, who is leading this current challenge) before being ultimately repealed by the Trump administration in 2018. Complicating matters even further, in 2021, during the waning days of the Trump administration, a federal judge repealed the rejection of the Clean Power Plan as well as Trump’s weak replacement for the policy.

Even weirder still, the Biden administration actually hasn’t introduced its replacement policy yet—there’s currently no EPA regulation of the power sector actively on the books. Usually, Supreme Court cases are based around an actual policy or piece of regulation that is in play, but this case is based on the idea of what the agency is able to do under the Clean Air Act. The fact that the conservative Court took up this case against a theoretical policy and ruled in favor of the plaintiffs signals that it is more willing to take an active hand in dismantling federal agencies’ ability to regulate than the role the judicial branch would normally play.

“This is a Court that’s now taking on a series of precedents like we’ve never seen a Court do, really, in our lifetime,” said Lisa Graves, who served in the U.S. Department of Justice and now runs True North Research, a public policy watchdog group. “For this Court to try to take away the EPA’s power, it’s not inside baseball—it’s a dramatic departure from federal policy, from legal precedent.”

Why is the court’s ruling important?

The decision technically places the responsibility for regulating emissions from the power sector into the hands of the legislative branch. In a well-functioning democracy, Congress would be able to pass laws that would then direct the EPA to regulate emissions and pollution through specific mechanisms. But as anyone who has been paying any attention at all to the state of national U.S. politics can tell you, climate action in Congress has been dead in the water for the past decade or more. This, experts say, was a core part of the plan of the special interests that brought this case forward.

“The Court is not naïve,” Graves said. “The majority knows that Republicans have blocked in Congress every major significant effort to mitigate climate change in the past few decades. They know that some of the same forces that are behind the amicus briefs [in this case] have been able to thwart Congress’s ability to craft new laws to address this.”

And the interests lining up behind this case are powerful. The amicus briefs filed in support of the plaintiffs’ position read like a who’s who in organizations that have fought tooth and nail for polluters, including the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which has been a force in spreading climate denial, and the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, an advocacy group founded by the billionaire Koch brothers, arguably two of the most powerful pro-oil and gas political funders—and spreaders of climate denial—in recent decades. Charles Koch himself, Graves said, was a notable driving force in creating the conditions for this case, as well as other cases that could be teed up before this court. Many of the judges currently sitting on the court were nominated thanks to campaigns funded by some of the same pro-pollution donors behind this case. And this landmark ruling may be just the beginning of their attempts to give even more freebies to polluters.

“This case represents a victory for right-wing infrastructure that has been funded by Koch and other anonymous donors to try and strip away the power of our federal agencies to regulate industries, like Koch industries, the oil and gas industry, and more,” Graves said.


https://gizmodo.com/supreme-court-west-virginia-epa-power-pollution-ruling-1849112254/amp

The business interests of heavy polluters have trumped your personal health and well-being, Americans. Welcome to a more toxic future.

Edited by Cymbal (06/30/22 09:40 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblefeeversM
Male


Registered: 12/28/10
Posts: 8,780
Re: Supreme Court Says Fed Can’t Regulate 4 Clean Air & Water [Re: Cymbal]
    #27843777 - 06/30/22 12:45 PM (1 year, 10 months ago)

States rights bro

Just move to a blue state if you want the good air

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 34,046
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 19 minutes, 10 seconds
Re: Supreme Court Says Fed Can’t Regulate 4 Clean Air & Water [Re: feevers]
    #27843791 - 06/30/22 12:59 PM (1 year, 10 months ago)

All the Dems have to do is win the next 9 federal elections in a row by historical margins and we can reverse this.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,847
Last seen: 1 hour, 26 minutes
Re: Supreme Court Says Fed Can’t Regulate 4 Clean Air & Water [Re: The Ecstatic] * 1
    #27843892 - 06/30/22 02:22 PM (1 year, 10 months ago)

This case carries some fun implications for the future: regulatory agencies would no longer be able to regulate.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblefeeversM
Male


Registered: 12/28/10
Posts: 8,780
Loc: Flag
Re: Supreme Court Says Fed Can’t Regulate 4 Clean Air & Water [Re: Kryptos]
    #27843910 - 06/30/22 02:39 PM (1 year, 10 months ago)

Corporations will regulate themselves though right

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKryptos
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,847
Last seen: 1 hour, 26 minutes
Re: Supreme Court Says Fed Can’t Regulate 4 Clean Air & Water [Re: feevers]
    #27843966 - 06/30/22 03:40 PM (1 year, 10 months ago)

Of course! You like lead in your water, don't ya? makes it taste sweet.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OnlinePatlal
You ask too many questions
Male User Gallery


Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,849
Loc: Ottawa Flag
Last seen: 29 seconds
Re: Supreme Court Says Fed Can’t Regulate 4 Clean Air & Water [Re: Kryptos]
    #27844065 - 06/30/22 04:46 PM (1 year, 10 months ago)

All the air pollution will be trapped in the red states.  You guys worry too much


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibledonwats
2d Gamer
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/28/19
Posts: 474
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
Re: Supreme Court Says Fed Can’t Regulate 4 Clean Air & Water [Re: Patlal]
    #27844883 - 07/01/22 11:39 AM (1 year, 10 months ago)

Maybe now the EPA will invest its resources on more serious environmental issues and stop being a political pawn.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleCymbal
Kill your idol
Registered: 06/29/22
Posts: 76
Re: Supreme Court Says Fed Can’t Regulate 4 Clean Air & Water [Re: donwats] * 1
    #27844893 - 07/01/22 11:48 AM (1 year, 10 months ago)

That’s a nonsense take

Republicans are the ones who have politicized the environment and public health, and now they’ve defanged the EPA so corporate interests can operate unchecked

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Kraken Kratom Shop: Kratom Capsules for Sale


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* President Bush nominates Samuel Alito to the US Supreme Court. psilomonkey 643 3 10/31/05 08:35 AM
by lonestar2004
* Tradesport.com Favors Clement for Supreme Court lonestar2004 656 2 07/19/05 04:01 PM
by lonestar2004
* new supreme court nominee has never been a judge afoaf 1,093 13 10/03/05 08:55 PM
by afoaf
* Supreme Court term packed with meaty cases lonestar2004 934 4 10/03/05 02:18 PM
by lonestar2004
* US supreme court quashes illegal guantanmo trials carbonhoots 1,042 5 07/01/06 06:44 AM
by niteowl
* Supreme Court ruling: police may now use drug sniffing dogs during routine traffic stops SWEDEN 2,429 15 01/29/05 05:00 PM
by Swami
* Supreme Court to hear 'Pledge' Case
( 1 2 all )
afoaf 2,440 26 10/16/03 07:03 PM
by afoaf
* The Supreme Court likes treats! afoaf 1,007 4 03/03/04 04:42 PM
by mabus

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
1,253 topic views. 1 members, 4 guests and 9 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.029 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 14 queries.