The Supreme Court takes a look at curtailing lawsuits aimed at punishing or regulating carbon emissions, and might even revisit its pro-environmentalist ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA. [Marcia Coyle, NLJ] Related: “Call for Papers: Civil Litigation as a Tool for Regulating Climate Change” [Valparaiso University School of Law via TortsProf]
2 Comments
One can only hope that Mass. v. EPA will be overruled. EPA’s expansion of its own powers could threaten any form of commerce in the U.S. See Butterworth, Is The EPA About To Shut Down Urban Renewal Across The U.S.?, Forbes, Sept. 15, 2010 http://blogs.forbes.com/trevorbutterworth/2010/09/15/is-the-epa-about-to-shut-down-urban-renewal-across-the-u-s/ [EPA, without an apparent health-based or other scientific basis, appears ready to propose dioxin levels so low that they will be at or below background levels typical for urban (commercial and residential) and agricultural lands. An immediate effect will be to thwart any effort to revive old urban sites, both commercial and industrial, for any productive use since the costs of remediation will be too great.]
The Obama administration, in a recently filed brief in the Connecticut case, American Electric Power v. Connecticut, is arguing that it may not be prudent for the high court to allow these types of cases to go forward.
You think! It is refreshing to see that even the Obama administration is taking a rational approach to these lawsuits. If we allow everyone who is impacted by some weather event to successfully sue the power companies, the end result will be the bankrupting of every power company. That is a great way to destroy the country.