Supreme Court Rules Against EPA's Inaction on Climate Change

In November, as I posted in this blog (click here to read the post), the Supreme Court heard a case brought by 12 states, including Maine, and various environmental groups to force EPA to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. EPA claimed that the Clean Air Act did not give the Department the authority to do so.

In a decision handed down today, the Supreme Court rejected the Bush Administration's case. While not saying what the regulations should contain, the 5 - 4 decision supports the claims of the plaintiffs that EPA must regulate global warming pollution.

Reuters reports (click here to read the article) that "the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 'has offered no reasoned explanation' for its refusal to regulate carbon dioxide and other emissions from new cars and trucks that contribute to climate change... Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the court majority, rejected the administration's argument that it lacked the power to regulate such emissions. He said the EPA's decision was arbitrary, capricious or otherwise not in accordance with law.'"

Hopefully, this decision is another example of the tide turning. With leadership from the federal level through the EPA, along with work being done in Congress, we may see a coordinated attempt by the United States, the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, to address this critical issue while we still have time to minimize the impact of climate change.

Click here if you want to read the Supreme Court's opinion "MASSACHUSETTS, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ET AL. "

The Supreme Court Shows How Far We Have To Go...

There is an excellent editorial in the Philadelphia Inquirer the summarizes the views of Supreme Court justices when they heard the case brought to them by various states (including Maine) and other organizations to require EPA to regulate CO2 emissions. See my 11/27 blog for more information about this important lawsuit.

The newspaper notes that the opinions of some of the justices are indicative of the opinions of many Americans. "Despite melting glaciers, rising sea levels, disappearing species, and volatile weather, many in America - beginning with President Bush - remain unconvinced. They insist on more conclusive evidence before curbing the greenhouse gases that scientists say are warming the Earth and causing the climate to change."

This is the challenge that we face. But, as each of us continue to make small changes every day - and slowly more and more people wake up to the risks - we will turn the tide. With or without the EPA and the federal government.

Spread the word!!! The more that we all talk about these issues and some of the solutions, the more likely we are to convince someone who is skeptical or doesn't believe that anything can be done.

Supreme Court To Hear Global Warming Case

The Portland Press Herald reports that Maine, along with 11 other states and a variety of environmental groups, will soon be arguing in front of the Supreme Court that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency must regulate the emissions of carbon dioxide from cars to help fight global warming.

Those against this approach include the federal government, automakers, the American Forest and Paper Association, the American Chemistry Council and the National Association of Manufacturers. Their argument is "no matter how serious a concern global climate change may be, that concern does not justify trying to shoehorn global climate change into a regulatory structure designed and enacted by Congress to address different types of problems."

Rather than try to fix the problem with whatever tools that we have available - in this case the Clean Air Act - they think that we should not do anything at all.

The unfortunate point that this important lawsuit makes all too clear is that there continues to be no leadership on climate change from Washington D.C. Luckily, the leadership is coming from the state and local levels. Rather than leading us to a path of hope and action, the White House and Congress continue to tell us why nothing can be done. It would be interesting to see how much progress the state and local leaders could make with help from Washington D.C.

With a new Democratic majority in Congress, let's hope that this leadership vacuum at the federal level is filled and that real solutions to the challenges of climate change are in our future. In the meantime, we will have to continue to do all that we can at the state and local levels.

For more information about this lawsuit, see the Massachusetts' Attorney General's website.