EPA wins their court battle over greenhouse gas rules

posted at 7:21 pm on June 26, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that the EPA is “unambiguously correct” in its assertion that industry and vehicle emissions are a danger to public health — one of the central tenets of their argument that they have ample justification for regulating greenhouse gases through the Clean Air Act.

The Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit strenuously backed the EPA’s finding that the climate-altering emissions pose a danger to public health and welfare. It also upheld the agency’s early requirements for vehicles and new industrial plants while rejecting every challenge brought by a host of industry groups, states and other critics. …

“The court’s decision should put an end, once and for all, to any questions about the EPA’s legal authority to protect us from industrial carbon pollution through the Clean Air Act,” said former White House climate adviser Carol Browner, who is now a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. “This decision is a devastating blow to those who challenge the overwhelming scientific evidence of climate change and deny its impact on public health and welfare.”

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, White House regulatory czar Cass Sunstein, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.) also registered their pleasure with the ruling. …

Climate skeptic Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) lamented: “This ‘big win’ for the Obama EPA is a huge loss for every American, especially those in the heartland states which rely on fossil fuel development and the affordable energy that comes with it.”

Le sigh. Whenever the EPA wins, we’ve all reasonably learned to expect that the economy, jobs, and energy prices are all going to necessarily suffer — the Obama administration’s arbitrary emissions standards don’t come cheap. Does this mean that once the EPA determines an emission poses any sort of a “danger” to the general welfare, they get to regulate it? How far are they going to be allowed to take that one? The independent federal agency isn’t exactly establishing a reputation for self-restraint (it seems to me that they’re making it their personal mission to persecute every type of affordable energy for having the audacity to not be wind and solar!).

And, sidenote: As far as the “overwhelming scientific evidence of climate change” — it looks like even the most zealous of environmentalists can find it in their hearts to step back and take a calm look at the facts behind the immediate and existential threat that is supposed to be man-made global warming.

James Lovelock, the maverick scientist who became a guru to the environmental movement with his “Gaia” theory of the Earth as a single organism, has admitted to being “alarmist” about climate change and says other environmental commentators, such as Al Gore, were too. …

However, the professor admitted in a telephone interview with msnbc.com that he now thinks he had been “extrapolating too far.” …

“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened,” Lovelock said.

“The climate is doing its usual tricks. There’s nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now,” he said.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Good grief. It just never ends with this administration.

GrannyDee on June 26, 2012 at 7:24 PM

Defund the EPA…

d1carter on June 26, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Wait. What? I’m first.

Well, hot dang.

GrannyDee on June 26, 2012 at 7:25 PM

A-EPA! abolish!!!!!!

sonnyspats1 on June 26, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Another reason to pound my head on this desk if these liberal turds aren’t shown the door in 133 days.

gsherin on June 26, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Look at the list of those that support this ruling…does that tell you anything about what the EPA is about?

d1carter on June 26, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Gird you loins, boys! The bureaucrats have court cart-blanc to subjugate and control you. Be afraid, be very afraid.

Phil-351 on June 26, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Good grief. It just never ends with this administration.

GrannyDee on June 26, 2012 at 7:24 PM

And it won’t until this country is brought to its knees and “fundamentally changed” into the socialist Utopia the left longs for.

But don’t worry! We’ll just vote them out of office!! Right?

Talon on June 26, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Politico:

The Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit strenuously backed the EPA’s finding that the climate-altering emissions pose a danger to public health and welfare.

LOL. Climate poses a danger to public health and welfare? I guess Alaska must be a permanent danger to all humans and unfit for habitation. Same for Texas and Florida. Clear ‘em out!

I hate lawyers. Hate, hate, hate them for their stupidity and their pleasure in parading it publicly.

The climate is a health threat, now. Okay doke. Any place where the average temperature is above or below the “perfect” static temperature for Earth must be a danger to the health and welfare of all humans.

I want a new country. One that doesn’t let the misanthropic, nihilistic leftist idiots out of their sandboxes.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 26, 2012 at 7:29 PM

Another reason to pound my head on this desk if these liberal turds aren’t shown the door in 133 days.
gsherin on June 26, 2012 at 7:27 PM

The EPA was started by a Republican not much different than Romney. What makes you think he’ll get rid of them?

MeatHeadinCA on June 26, 2012 at 7:30 PM

War on the private sector.

rbj on June 26, 2012 at 7:30 PM

DC circuit court ruling, it figures.

Mini-14 on June 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM

STOP BREATHING, ALL OF YOU!!
You’re killing Gaia!

AllahsNippleHair on June 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM

The only way most of this crud is going to get stopped is for the next congress and a new president set down laws with limits to ALL federal agencies. This is all part of the progressive/marxist salami game. They ratchet it up and hope their progressive fellow travelling judges keep it from being ratcheted back. Of course, since most republicans are NOT conservatives, the congress pussies will probably let everything stand. (I don’t know if I can get away with these expressions – you know, free speech is only for libruls.)

The interesting thing is that if Conservatives tried this over-reach, the news and demonstrations would make everybody miserable. I think it is approaching time for the ton ton macutes.

Old Country Boy on June 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM

As ever, conservatives cannot rely on the federal courts to do our work for us; it will be a long road, but the real tool to bring an abusive bureaucracy to heel is the ballot box. A new philosophically-committed administration and congress are a necessity to constrain and defund the EPA and other out-of-control agencies. Decisions like this should get people even more fired up for November.

Travis Bickle on June 26, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Memo to GOP:

This is what happens when you work with democrats.

Sincerely,

Richard Nixon

SouthernGent on June 26, 2012 at 7:34 PM

The Left’s fantasy utopia is reduce America to a small tribe huddled around one single campfire in Kansas. Then the EPA would say wood fires pollute too much, so we could starve in the dark.

I do not want to end the EPA.

I just want to transfer all personnel in the Agency today to North Korea for draft picks on home-schooled scientists. North Korea could benefit from some well-fed EPA bureaucrats.

NaCly dog on June 26, 2012 at 7:34 PM

The court also lent strong support to the EPA’s interpretation of climate change science, saying it had a “substantial record of evidence” that

greenhouse gases very likely cause climate change and that “extreme weather events, changes in air quality, increases in food- and water-borne pathogens, and increases in temperatures are likely to have adverse health effects.”

The judges also said the record of the case supports the “EPA’s conclusion that climate change endangers human welfare by creating risk to food production and agriculture, forestry, energy, infrastructure, ecosystems, and wildlife,” as well as risks to water and coastal resources.

you simply can’t have a country run by ignorant lawyers and corporations out to maximize their political connectedness…and bureaucrats out to micromanage the economy and the whole country

it won’t work.

r keller on June 26, 2012 at 7:36 PM

So let Barry’s EPA “do their thing”. When people start getting hit with higher prices, their revenge will be at the ballot box.

GarandFan on June 26, 2012 at 7:36 PM

This would be a great time for Romney to step up to plate and declare that, if elected president, he will abolish the EPA. I know, I know – but, I can dream, can’t I?

Pork-Chop on June 26, 2012 at 7:38 PM

The election means nothing.

/

CW on June 26, 2012 at 7:38 PM

OT I wonder if SF will take back the week they named after this guy? Warning disturbing info about kids in this article.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/06/26/child-porn-and-molestation-scandal-shocks-sf/

I noticed the local papers waited til after the gay pride parade was over to report this guy was arrested for kiddie porn.

warren on June 26, 2012 at 7:38 PM

It actually is quite simple, you have to get ready with the loss of fed money. But without the states – they have nothing as the states do almost all the leg work for the EPA.

Just ignore them.

Zomcon JEM on June 26, 2012 at 7:39 PM

Whenever the EPA wins, we’ve all reasonably learned to expect that the economy, jobs, and energy prices are all going to necessarily suffer — the Obama administration’s arbitrary emissions standards don’t come cheap. Does this mean that once the EPA determines an emission poses any sort of a “danger” to the general welfare, they get to regulate it? How far are they going to be allowed to take that one

.
This decision is a good test for the Romney campaign’s capabilities.

They have an opportunity to turn the EPA and the Obama administration’s attitudes towards coal, regulation and energy development into a defining issue for the middle portion of the country – you know, just those folks between the Appalachian and Rocky Mountains who might be interested in the jobs to be created vs destroyed by regulatory excesses.

They should let this ripen for a few weeks and wait for the EPA to tip its hand.

PolAgnostic on June 26, 2012 at 7:40 PM

Climate skeptic

Inhofe is from Oklahoma – he’s not a skeptic about the existence of climate. He’s just not onboard with AGW nonsense.

AGW is a scam and like most scams it involves the transfer of lots of cash.

The UK has a yearly ‘tax escalator’ on gasoline – every year gas tax goes up by a certain percentage, to discourage the creations of carbon dioxide.

It’s easy money y’all – doesn’t matter if you chop in your truck for a Civic, they’ll get their green eventually.

CorporatePiggy on June 26, 2012 at 7:42 PM

Any reason why this can’t be appealed to SCOUS? But even if so, I realize it would take at least two years to get there.

ABOLISH the EPA !

Axion on June 26, 2012 at 7:43 PM

greenhouse gases very likely cause climate change

Very likely? Well hell, let’s shut down the country. Plus they relied on the debunked IPCC report.

It won’t happen but wouldn’t it be nice if someone pulled the ‘tricity plug on DC for a day or two.

marinetbryant on June 26, 2012 at 7:46 PM

The court was correct in their reasoning.

However, Congress can pass a law that supersedes the EPA’s ruling.

Contributor X on June 26, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Price per barrel of oil $80.00. Why gas is still 3.50 a gallon? The value of the dollar, inflation and the EPA. Thanks government.

lowandslow on June 26, 2012 at 7:50 PM

All I can say is 207 more days until sanity hits Washington D.C. I just hope that Romney realizes he’s going to have to clean house at EPA and get rid of all these ideological bureaucrats Obama and Company have put in there.

Romney is going to be so busy, he has to clean out EPA, clean out Justice, clean out the Commerce Department, and clean out the Energy Department. He should also clean out the State Department. The Hardest job he’s going to have is finding enough capitalists to fill the positions he cleans out. Our colleges and universities aren’t training capitalists any more, just socialists.

bflat879 on June 26, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Mark Levin was ranting about this earlier tonight. It’s one more major way in which we’re being ruled and regulated out of our freedoms and rights to duly created Constitutional legislation and the power is being put in the hands of greasy, grimy environmentalists and their useless idiotic leftistproglibturd bureaucratic puppets.

stukinIL4now on June 26, 2012 at 7:51 PM

“This decision is a devastating blow to those who challenge the overwhelming scientific evidence of climate change and deny its impact on public health and welfare.”

Wow. Why do I hear the song “The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald” after reading that?

B-Ri on June 26, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Gird you loins, boys! The bureaucrats have court cart-blanc to subjugate and control you. Be afraid, be very afraid.

Phil-351 on June 26, 2012 at 7:28 PM

.

Be afraid angry, be very afraid angry. ; (
.

A-EPA! abolish!!!!!!

sonnyspats1 on June 26, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Any reason why this can’t be appealed to SCOUS? But even if so, I realize it would take at least two years to get there.

ABOLISH the EPA !

Axion on June 26, 2012 at 7:43 PM

.
Motion is made, and seconded . . . All those in favor of abolishing the EPA, say “aye”.
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . AYE ! ! !

listens2glenn on June 26, 2012 at 7:54 PM

AYE!!!

Ditkaca on June 26, 2012 at 7:56 PM

AYE!!!!!!

AllahsNippleHair on June 26, 2012 at 7:57 PM

Wow. Why do I hear the song “The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald” after reading that?

B-Ri on June 26, 2012 at 7:52 PM

.
Careful how you use that analogy . . . . . . they might try to blame that on “global warming”.

listens2glenn on June 26, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Defund the EPA…

d1carter on June 26, 2012 at 7:25 PM

LOL – you and who’s army?

Cuz the GOP establishment ain’t gonna defund them. They’ve had many chances to and passed on it every single time.

I see Boehner preparing a “strongly worded letter” … and that’s about it! LOL

HondaV65 on June 26, 2012 at 8:03 PM

EPA…….Environmentalists Plague on America!!

When the EPA wins………individual freedom and Liberty loses.

Like what will happen when Roberts and Kennedy lead the 6-3 decision for Americans to face the Death Panels.

Tyranny is blooming in America..

..and the stench grows stronger everyday.

We must spray “Round Up” on it in the primaries and on November 6th.

PappyD61 on June 26, 2012 at 8:05 PM

And people want Obama for a 2nd term?
A vote for a democrat is a vote for
the communist party.

redguy on June 26, 2012 at 8:07 PM

bflat879 on June 26, 2012 at 7:50 PM

How? You do realize that most of the bureaucrats have been in the EPA for years and have civil service protections. Only the executive level serve at the discretion of the President. Those executives would turn over anyway. The problem will be the new executives and what their beliefs are. No guarantee they will be any better. And I wouldn’t necessarily blame Romney for that.

chemman on June 26, 2012 at 8:09 PM

“The court’s decision should put an end, once and for all, to any questions about the EPA’s legal authority to protect us from industrial carbon pollution through the Clean Air Act,” said former White House climate adviser Carol Browner…

.
FORGET IT !!!! There is no such thing as “once and for all” when it comes to authoritarian abuse such as that distributed by the EPA. Conservatives will battle the EPA and all other over-reaching executive agencies for as long as it takes to regain control of this nation. Ignorance is no excuse for the EPA saddle America with Euroweenie-style regulations and abuses. Soon, these idiots will be gone and reality will reign supreme.
.
Defund, disband and eliminate the EPA as Nixonian authoritarianism; Education and Energy soon to follow the road to bureaucratic wasteland of dismemberment.

ExpressoBold on June 26, 2012 at 8:10 PM

It is not just a problem with the Administration but also the federal courts and the politicians in black robes that populate them.

Global warming is a farce and we can use Nullification to bypass any decisions that are outside its powers as applied through the doctrine of “original intent.”

As I have noted before, constitutional scholar Edwin Vieira (PhD, JD Harvard) has provided an in-depth analysis of where We The People stand WRT the federal courts.

“Blackstone’s Commentaries was the standard legal treatise for Americans when the Constitution was written and its discussion of the law was used extensively by the Founders. The Supreme Court is not supreme – because as Blackstone pointed out “whenever a question arises between the society at large and any magistrate vested with powers originally delegated by that society, it must be decided by the voice of the society itself: there is not upon earth any other tribunal to resort to.”

The real Federal government consists of 5 parts, the Congress, President, Judiciary, the states, and We The People. Each of these Branches of government has the right, power, and duty, to support and defend the Constitution because Congress/Pres/judges/state officials because of the oath of affirmation from them to that effect, and We The People because the people were responsible for the “ordain[ing] and establish[ing]” of the Constitution in the first place, and ultimately control its substance through the process of amendment. Congress does exercise political supremacy because it can impeach judges and the President. But it must have its actions ratified or rejected by the electorate. Thus, ultimate supremacy lies with We The People. And supremacy must lie there: For if the principals cannot decide the meaning of their own supreme law, it is absurd to believe their mere agents can.”

Falcon46 on June 26, 2012 at 8:19 PM

Ten short years ago,
We all liked the EPA.
Now they are hated.

It was not too long ago that the EPA had, by far, the highest favorability rating of any Federal agency. Criticism of the Agency was limited to the fever swamps of the far right. The vast majority of Americans trusted them, and thought they were on the side of the angels.

That is why the Obamabots used the EPA to advance their agenda to grow the government. Now the Agency is the leading edge of the Leviathan, and the people are beginning to hate them.

Haiku Guy on June 26, 2012 at 8:20 PM

The EPA has very little to do with protecting the environment and literally everything to do with forcing the liberal agenda into every single person’s life who lives in the USA in every way possible. its the democrat party, Gestapo version.

Every program the liberals have hammered this country with is nothing to do with the children, they’re all about politics.

The all need to go, and just the essential needs replaced with programs that can’t be corrupted and never run by liberals.

Speakup on June 26, 2012 at 8:20 PM

to protect us from industrial carbon pollution through the Clean Air Act,” said former White House climate adviser Carol Browner…

I’m going to have a meltdown with the ignorance of conflating Carbon with Carbon Dioxide.

chemman on June 26, 2012 at 8:22 PM

“This decision is a devastating blow to those who challenge the overwhelming scientific evidence of climate change and deny its impact on public health and welfare.”

FALLACIOUS CONCLUSION

John the Libertarian on June 26, 2012 at 8:23 PM

Crazy. GWarming is bs.
We know that the hockey stick graph was debunked as a leftist agenda-driven fabrication; what that means is that current temps are not unusual, and… that there is nothing wrong with the climate.
Second, there is no evidence that CO2 has anything to do with the climate. All there is is an arguable ambiguous theoretical model, no empirical evidence. The ipcc founded their theory on the claim that there is a CO2 / temperature causal correlation. FALSE. This was debunked circa 2001. Still, ~ 98% of the public does not know this, that’s why it’s important that we spread the word about this 3 minute video that calls out algor for knowingly repeating the ipcc deception, watch it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK_WyvfcJyg

anotherJoe on June 26, 2012 at 8:26 PM

HondaV65 on June 26, 2012 at 8:03 PM

LOL, oh noes not another strongly worded letter…

d1carter on June 26, 2012 at 8:29 PM

to protect us from industrial carbon pollution through the Clean Air Act,” said former White House climate adviser Carol Browner…

I’m going to have a meltdown with the ignorance of conflating Carbon with Carbon Dioxide.

chemman on June 26, 2012 at 8:22 PM | Delete

How about the delibrate ignorance of the left in conflating carbon dioxide – which every breathing organism on this planet exhales, and which every green plant requires – with carbon monoxide, which is the true toxic gas, component of smog yadda yadda. Carbon Dioxide is only 4/100ths of 1% of our atmospheric composition yet that razor thin amount sustains all of our chlorophyll-based life. AND it has been pulled from ancient glacial ice cores tens and hundreds of thousands of years old in substantially higher percentages, despite there being no pesky human civiliation around to generate those high levels.

The eco marxists are peretrating a massive fraud re Carbon Dioxide. They should pay a very high price for this fraud.

rayra on June 26, 2012 at 8:35 PM

They’re simply not leaving us any alternative but force.

Midas on June 26, 2012 at 8:46 PM

The new religion of the Left.

rockmom on June 26, 2012 at 8:52 PM

Its either us or them.

tom daschle concerned on June 26, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Levin was not happy and one of the judges was Janice Rogers Brown.

Cindy Munford on June 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM

So what’s mittness’ position on this ruling? Afterall he was pretty quick and decisive on SB1070 the other day. Oh wait, he hasn’t checked the wind yet to pronounce that the court has spoken and Cass is an expert to be heeded.

AH_C on June 26, 2012 at 9:08 PM

I’m glad that the court cited schoolhouse rock as precedent for finding it unlikely that it is likely for congress to pass corrective legislation

This theory fails. To establish standing, plaintiffs must demonstrate that it is “likely, as opposed to merely speculative,that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision,” Lujan,504 U.S. at 561 (internal quotation marks omitted), but here,State Petitioners simply hypothesize that Congress will enact “corrective legislation.” State Pet’rs’ Timing & Tailoring Reply Br. 15. We have serious doubts as to whether, for standing purposes, it is ever “likely” that Congress will enact legislation at all. After all, a proposed bill must make it through committees in both the House of Representatives and the Senate and garner a majority of votes in both chambers—overcoming, perhaps, a filibuster in the Senate. If passed, the bill must then be signed into law by the President, or go back to Congress so that it may attempt to override his veto. As a generation of schoolchildren knows, “by that time, it’s very unlikely that [a bill will] become a law. It’s not easy to become a law.” Schoolhouse Rock, I’m J u s t a B i l l , a t 2 : 4 1 , a v a i l a b l e a t http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7266360872513258
185# (last visited June 1, 2012).

Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on June 26, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Industry needs to start closing power plants supplying DC

States then should not allow power to be shipped across state lines. Let DC run on wind and solar. Same with MA & CA.

KenInIL on June 26, 2012 at 9:15 PM

When the founding fathers were trying to write a constitution to protect us from tyrant wannabees and kleptocrats, they never considered Enviro Wackos. It seems you can do almost anything as long as it is through the EPA. Now that the Obama administration has the court approved authority to put out regulations that economically destroy anyone they want to, how many industries will be forwarding backsheesh campaign donations to have them clobber their competitors instead of themselves?

KW64 on June 26, 2012 at 9:16 PM

…AYE…!!!

KOOLAID2 on June 26, 2012 at 9:16 PM

“The court’s decision should put an end, once and for all, to any questions about the EPA’s legal authority to protect us from industrial carbon pollution through the Clean Air Act,” said former White House climate adviser Carol Browner, who is now a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. “This decision is a devastating blow to those who challenge the overwhelming scientific evidence of climate change and deny its impact on public health and welfare.”

Can it protect us from the carbon pollution emitted anytime Carol Browner opens her yap?

Bitter Clinger on June 26, 2012 at 9:19 PM

The EPA was started by a Republican not much different than Romney. What makes you think he’ll get rid of them?

MeatHeadinCA on June 26, 2012 at 7:30 PM

1) They don’t have an answer for you.

2) They fear and despise real conservatives more than they do the bureaucracy. Deep down, they really kind of like the bureaucracy (as long as it’s in their hands).

3) It’s one of the reasons I’m no longer a republican.

trigon on June 26, 2012 at 9:24 PM

posted at 7:21 pm on June 26, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Do plaintiffs plan to appeal to SCOTUS?

jaime on June 26, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Its either us or them.

tom daschle concerned on June 26, 2012 at 8:59 PM

“They” apparently have all three branches of govt. “Us” just need to eat our peas and shut up :(

arnold ziffel on June 26, 2012 at 9:47 PM

A Y E!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Katfish on June 26, 2012 at 10:16 PM

The only solution is to win the next election. Big.

MTF on June 26, 2012 at 10:18 PM

We need a bunch of the governors to get together and decide to, collectively, just say ‘no’. What are the Feds going to do if enough of the states hang tough and just refuse to go along? Can’t be just two or three – you’d need about 20 to really tip the scales, but I think it would be kinda interesting to see where that went…

affenhauer on June 26, 2012 at 10:49 PM

Levin ranted about this on his show today, worth listening to the podcast.

karenhasfreedom on June 26, 2012 at 10:56 PM

Congress shall make no law respecting an Establishment of Religion!

Um, isn’t Gaia a Goddess?

jaydee_007 on June 26, 2012 at 11:38 PM

Levin ranted about this on his show today, worth listening to the podcast.

karenhasfreedom on June 26, 2012 at 10:56 PM

Just listening to it now. Now, that my late night oil change is done.
So religious the care of vehicles, I can and do freshen the ‘earl’ in the dark.
Is there a scientifically based theory in all this hoo-haw?
A scientist, chemist working there at EPA?
Didn’t think so.

Another root and branch candidate.

mickytx on June 26, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Ok fine, you win.

Just a few months ago I said of the EPA and comparable authorities something like:

“Yes, they’ve gone too far; but the EPA still provides a valuable service, and they just need reined in not ended”.

But they’ve worn me down.

Shut it down, shut it all down… let the states pick up the slack, or let it go to crap. Anything is better than this, or more appropriately nothing (as in doing nothing) is better than this.

I’m no longer convinced it’s even possible to fix it.

gekkobear on June 27, 2012 at 12:08 AM

By this logic, humans breathing are producing environmentally dangerous gases.

The EPA will be able to regulate breathing?

profitsbeard on June 27, 2012 at 1:56 AM

just for the record Mitt believes in man made global warinmg so don’t look for the EPA to be defunded no matter which person wins in nov.

unseen on June 27, 2012 at 2:28 AM

We need a bunch of the governors to get together and decide to, collectively, just say ‘no’. What are the Feds going to do if enough of the states hang tough and just refuse to go along? Can’t be just two or three – you’d need about 20 to really tip the scales, but I think it would be kinda interesting to see where that went…

affenhauer on June 26, 2012 at 10:49 PM

the fed gov will just withhold funds to those states. highway funds, block grants etc. until the states cave or they will waves big bribes in the states faces so that the state reps and senators override the govenors

unseen on June 27, 2012 at 2:30 AM

Look slike another Case that the SCOTUS will decide. pretty sad when our country is so divided that 9 men and woman decide the direction of the country instead of our elected leaders who are too weak to fight the special interests that get big bucks form “green” jobs

unseen on June 27, 2012 at 2:32 AM

Appears to me the court knew at the start how he was going to rule. It’s the only explanation for ignoring the fact that the EPA didn’t use scientific methods.

sadatoni on June 27, 2012 at 6:35 AM

they’re making it their personal mission to persecute every type of affordable energy for having the audacity to not be wind and solar!

Yes they are, because they know wind and solar are too inefficient to supply the energy we need at prices we can afford.

If some magician came up with a way to make wind or solar a practical source of energy, the environmental Marxists would turn against it, just as they turned against natural gas.

Environmental Marxism: Using environmentalism to strangle capitalism and redistribute Western wealth.

Lord Christopher Monckton – Agenda 21 and Environmental Marxism.mp4

petefrt on June 27, 2012 at 7:26 AM

unseen on June 27, 2012 at 2:30 AM

The governors will have to Stand firm and kill the programs that the money is used to extort from the states.

Slowburn on June 27, 2012 at 7:54 AM

Why does the news ignore the precipitators and scrubbers erected to clean the discharged gases from these fossil fueled plants? These facilities are completely left out of the reporting articles about fossil plants.

mixplix on June 27, 2012 at 8:04 AM

Meanwhile, Shrillary pledges 2 billion of our tax dollars to support global warming and a global EPA under the UN.

petefrt on June 27, 2012 at 8:20 AM

Another nail in the destruction of America.

TerryW on June 27, 2012 at 8:51 AM

I still don’t see any evidence that 0.04% of ANY thermodynamic problem can be considered a driving factor, let alone catastrophic to the planet. This makes no sense at all.

Schwalbe Me-262 on June 27, 2012 at 9:08 AM

Meanwhile, Shrillary pledges 2 billion of our tax dollars to support global warming and a global EPA under the UN.

petefrt on June 27, 2012 at 8:20 AM

Hillary can promise the moon and stars, but Congress controls the purse. Or they use to anyway.

Axion on June 27, 2012 at 9:10 AM

When the rolling brownouts and blackouts start, when the gubbermint checks bounce because no one has a private sector job, when the riots start, we can all be happy knowing our air is so pristine.

Bevan on June 27, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Chubby Lisa will be packing her things as soon as the new leadership arrives in a few months.

Amazingoly on June 27, 2012 at 9:23 AM

The EPA was begun by a Republican (please don’t say conservative) President who made the continuing GOP error of believing that the Democrats would just this once act honestly in the aftermath of a negotiation. Just as Reagan offered a limited amnesty in trade for stronger immigration controls which never happened, as several Republicans agreed to tax increases for which the Democrats promised (but never delivered) spending cuts…

It goes on and on. The Right (or at least Right-of-Center) makes a deal, the Left breaks it, while still demanding the other end of the deal be upheld. Never presume that the left will negotiate in good faith. It’s a fool move.

Re-arm, reload, and attack.

Freelancer on June 27, 2012 at 10:09 AM

When will the EPA start forced abortions for the environment? Being that the court allows them to do anything they want, this is a valid question.

Axion on June 27, 2012 at 12:33 PM

John has a long moustache.

John has a long moustache.

The chair is against the wall.

The chair is against the wall.

orbitalair on June 27, 2012 at 12:53 PM

I say we try every single member of the EPA for TREASON!?!

Colatteral Damage on June 27, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Science by courts: what a dystopia!

Olo_Burrows on July 1, 2012 at 3:42 AM