The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether or not to block litigation brought against the federal government by environmentalists demanding more be done to fight man-made global warming.
The Trump administration asked the high court to issue a stay on litigation brought by environmental activists representing a group of young adults suing the federal government for violating their supposed constitutional right to a “stable climate system.”
While environmentalists framed the administration’s motion as a desperate attempt, legal experts said the Supreme Court could decide to block the youths’ climate lawsuit from moving forward.
“It’s an incredibly ambitious case, so I would not be surprised if the Supreme Court stayed discovery,” Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Andrew Grossman, an attorney at BakerHostetler, said the suit should have been dismissed out of the gate and plaintiffs only made it this far by “forum-shopping” for a sympathetic court. However, Grossman said activists’ enjoining of President Donald Trump might get the Supreme Court’s attention.
“Even those bizarre circumstances might not warrant intervention by the Supreme Court, but the highly unusual attempt to enjoin the president in the performance of his official duties and to force the government into a pointless show trial may attract its interest,” said Grossman, who’s also a Cato Institute adjunct scholar.
The environmental group Our Children’s Trust filed suit against the federal government in 2015 on behalf of 21 youths, arguing their constitutional rights were being violated.
The government should move “to ensure that atmospheric CO2 is no more concentrated than 350 [parts per million] by 2100 … to stabilize the climate system,” reads the group’s legal complaint.
The U.S. District Court in Oregon ruled in 2016 the plaintiffs had standing to sue, which was reaffirmed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in March. The Trump administration’s motion to stay the suit and any discovery was rejected by the 9th Circuit on Monday.
The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to intervene Tuesday and issue a stay that the 9th Circuit denied.
“The Supreme Court should see this as nothing more than the latest contortion by the Trump Administration to avoid facing these courageous youths in court, deny the government’s request, and allow this case to proceed using the normal judicial process,” Erika Lennon, an attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, told ThinkProgress.
Critics argue the lawsuit is nothing more than a way to circumvent the legislative process. It would let activists control policy decisions that should be left up to elected officials, they argue.
“The activist groups that brought it avoided that fate only though forum-shopping and the Ninth Circuit’s unwillingness to exercise reasonable supervision over a district court that apparently believes it has the authority to determine the nation’s climate policy and force the federal government to implement it,” Grossman told TheDCNF.
Federal judges heard oral arguments from the government and Our Children’s Trust attorneys on Wednesday. The Supreme Court has yet to issue a decision on the Trump administration’s request for a stay.
Read more at Daily Caller
The litigants must prove that CO2 is causing global warming, hence climate change, or withdraw their suit.
There is no proof, whatsoever, that CO2 is causing climate change let alone man-made climate change.
Right Al but that’s not the point. Read para. 8 – ‘to ensure that atmospheric CO2 should……’ Somebody kindly tell me, short of WW111 how the U.S. GOVERNMENT is going to control worldwide CO2 emissions or reduce them.
The emissions that should be controlled are from the mouths of the insanely alt-left 9th circuit court judges.
Since this lawsuit (and others like it) are about something that isn’t happening, the lower courts should throw it out as the frivolous nonsense it is and charge those bringing the suit (and others like them) with hefty court costs. CO2 does not cause global warming. It is a trace gas in the atmosphere that is beneficial to all of our plant life and is the source of the oxygen those plants exude and therefore beneficial to all oxygen-breathing animal life (including humans).
You notice that this suit was filed in the most liberal part of the nation with the most left-wing circuit court, the one overturned most frequently by the Supreme Court. Hopefully this too will be overturned and tossed out by SCOTUS.
You must wonder what mind of crap they have been reading in their text books or from some Eco-Wacko or watching reruns of Captain Planet and what ever happened with My Weekly Reader?
I’m guessing that the constitutional right to a stable climate falls under the same emanations and penumbras that discovered the constitutional right to abortion.
The worst thing about this suit is it is an attempt at judicial legislation. This when an objective can not make it through the normal legislative process (usually for good reason), by using law suit the courts implement the objective. By going around the legislative process democracy is serious undermined. However, anyone filing such a suit does not care about democracy.
There is also nothing in the Constitution to base the suit on except far fetched interpretations. Yet, items that are explicitly covered in the Constitution are considered irrelevant. Remember the Sierra Club’s statement that free speech isn’t absolute and people need to be held accountable for what they say.
Statements by others that carbon dioxide is not impacting the climate are true. However, a concept that most activist have probably never head of is that mankind’s release of CO2 is trivial in comparison to what nature releases.
The lawsuit is a nonsense. Ask Canute.
Protecting and maintaining Democracy is expensive. What better way to overthrow it than undermine it’s foundation, capitalism? Tax anything that moves via a carbon tax.
I wonder if “the children” understand what they’re wishing for?
If “the children” did understand this then they wouldn’t be part of such an inane lawsuit. Nor would they think Socialism is the way to go.