by Bob Unruh
The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to review a case that alleges
the Environmental Protection Agency broke the rules in 2009 to describe
carbon dioxide, which is essential for life, as a danger and through
rules and regulations take control of the nation’s economy.
It is this claim, that CO2 poses a health threat, that is the
foundation for most of the “green” energy projects today, the
alternative wind, solar and battery projects, the increasing mileage
requirements for vehicles and the billions of dollars in government
spending that has been designated for this issue.
Attorneys with the Pacific Legal Foundation
have asked the justices to accept the case for review, arguing that the
agency adopted the new standard describing CO2 as a danger without
allow the decision to undergo a mandatory review by scientists expert on
the question.
“Because carbon dioxide is everywhere, the Endangerment Finding
empowers EPA to regulate the nation’s physical, economic and social
infrastructure,” the pleading explains. “It bears repeating: This court
in Massachusetts v. EPA, which also involved carbon dioxide, determined
that the writ of certiorari should be granted because of ‘the unusual
importance of the underlying issue.’
“If ever there were an issue of exceptional importance to the nation,
it is to be found in the Endangerment Finding. The possibility that a
finding of such great moment was made illegally provides ample
justification for granting the writ.”
“We are asking the Supreme Court to hear this case because EPA cannot
be allowed to place itself above the law,” said PLF Staff Attorney Ted
Hadzi-Antich. “In issuing its CO2 finding, EPA illegally shielded its
work product from peer review. That’s unacceptable as a matter of
science, impermissible as a matter of law – and should be downright
offensive for anyone concerned about openness, accountability, and
integrity in the public sector.”
The dispute is over the EPA’s announcement in December 2009 that
carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles pose a danger to public
health. With that announcement, the Clean Air Act kicked in, and
required the EPA to create regulations that control the emissions.
However, before those rules are allowed, the Clean Air Act itself
“requires that such regulations must first be submitted to EPA’s Science
Advisory Board…”
That, the foundation explains, never was done, even though it was mandatory.
That means the nation’s rules and regulations concern CO2 emissions could very well be illegitimate.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Document your thoughts for future generations