Tag Archives: litigation

Mr. Mitch McConnell Seeking to Disrupt US Government Through In-Action

“More than 100 national leaders urged Senate Republican leaders on Tuesday to use every means at their disposal to confirm more than 200 presidential nominations currently pending in the U.S. Senate, both for the executive branch and for the federal courts.” click here

California Cities Seek to Protect the Earth from Natural Processes

Climates change. In a rational world this case would not be considered credible. But this is California….Lawsuits without merit like this have been attempted before. Seems like these attorneys think EPA stands for the Earth Protection Agency…..doing all they can to protect the earth from natural processes.

 

 

“City attorneys in San Francisco and Oakland, California, sued five oil companies in two coordinated lawsuits on Tuesday, arguing that the courts should hold these companies responsible for climate change, and force them to financially compensate the cities for harm the plaintiffs claim those companies are causing to the planet’s environment.” click here

Climate Change RICO Lawsuit Filed

Given the wild claims being made in California and elsewhere it is certainly plausible that more is going on here than meets the eye.

“The lawsuit accuses the defendants of misappropriating tens of billions of dollars from public funds, and re-investing a large part of the misappropriated funds back into the allegedly illegal scheme.  The lawsuit singles out defendant Ceres, Inc., claiming it intends to steal $36 Trillion of public money over the next 36 years.  Workers and pensioners of California and New York are among the most vulnerable, but public funds and even private investments in other states are also in danger, according to the plaintiff.” click here for full post at WUWT

Obama “Clean Power Plan” Faces Legal Scrutiny

“The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit will hear oral arguments Tuesday in West Virginia v. EPA, the legal challenge to President Barack Obama’s signature global warming initiative, the Clean Power Plan (CPP).” click here

Is it Time to Prosecute Government-Funded Climate Alarmists for Fraud

Someone will be mad at me for asking this question. But I’m just wondering….click here

 

Peruvian Farmer is Confused, Misguided on “Climate Change”

If a strict liability standard is applied properly this is a frivolous lawsuit and should be thrown out. I do have a lot sympathy for this farmer’s situation. But climates change naturally with or without RWE.

The carbon dioxide the farmer emits every time he exhales has a direct impact on the atmosphere above his farm since he lives right there. What proportion of the climate stress he is experiencing is due to his own existence and choices? 

“A Peruvian farmer has filed a landmark lawsuit against German energy giant RWE, saying that the company’s fossil fuel emissions endanger his family, livelihood and hometown, a German NGO said Tuesday.” click here

 

Justice Janice Rogers Brown gets it right on the GHG endangerment finding….

This is a very long post. Please use the navigation links to the left to view other postings below.

USEPA has embarked on issuing a variety of regulations to control emission of greenhouse gases using the Clean Air Act (CAA). This flurry of activity results from an earlier Supreme Court ruling that upheld USEPA’s GHG endangerment finding under the CAA.  The endangement finding was a clear stretch of the imagination by the court. A legal challenge to GHG rules was filed in the US District Court of Appeals, DC Circuit, and a panel of judges upheld their legality. A petition was filed requesting that the entire court rule on the appeal, which was recently denied. In her desent, Justice Janice Rogers Brown provides a good explanation of why the Supreme Court erred in their ruling on the GHG endangerment finding, which indeed they did. The broad expanse of the term “pollutant” in that ruling is well-beyond the original context and intent of the Clean Air Act statute.

I have provided the full written dissent of Justice Brown below. As during the 1990s in litigation involving the Safe Drinking Water Act, the prevailing opinion explained by Sentelle provides political cover for a lawless agency (USEPA), rather than recognizing and honoring the rule of law as intended by the CAA. If congress intended GHG emissions to be regulated, congress could have explicitly enacted legislation to do so. (Click here for the full ruling.)

cover

page 1 crop

page 2 crop

page 3 crop

Page 4 crop

page 5 crop

page 6 crop

page 7 crop

page 8 crop

page 9 crop

page 10 crop

page 11 crop

page 12 crop

page 13 crop

page 14 crop

page 15 cover

page 16 cover

page 17 crop

page 18 cover

page 19 crop

page 20 crop

page 21 crop

page 22 crop

page 23 crop