Looks like SCOTUS just wrecked it, 5-4. Couldn’t happen to a nicer dictator.
The stay implies that they think the administration is likely to lose on the merits when the case is argued. But this points out the stakes of the election, given that the next president is likely to appoint more than one justice.
[Wednesday-morning update]
Jonathan Adler explains the ruling. (Note: He is more concerned about climate change than I am.)
Well, Roberts hasn’t worked out all that well. And can we really expect anyone better?
Don’t forget that you got Scalia and you got Alito so yes it can work out better.
And you got GWB leaving over a third of federal judgeships empty for Obama to fill because he didn’t want to make Chuckie Schumer mad. We’ll all be paying the price of that particular piece of negligence for years to come.
Whoever said GWB was the perfect or even a great President?
Not sure why you’re making all these assumptions.
All I’m saying is that yes Roberts was a bad choice but that Alito and Scalia were great choices so it isn’t guaranteed to work out badly.
I should have said, “anyone better in the current climate.” I believe the GOPe is entirely happy with a left-leaning court these days.
Astonishing that it was only 5 to 4.
Maybe this is why Democrats always go on about everything being rigged, because they rig things and its all projection.
Not with this court.
Interesting point in Volokh, that a good reason for the stay was that the EPA has already boasted (on a similar case) that without the stay they don’t really care what the court does: it was already too late, businesses have had to comply already.
Indeed, even if the policy were reversed later, if it goes into effect at all massive damage is done. Force a coal plant to shut down and it will be years before the industry can recover from the loss. And preventing significant irreparable damage is an important factor when granting a preliminary injunction.
As the old saying goes, process is punishment. The EPA under Obama, has been out of control. Who knew the EPA had the power to put cities under the control of reservations?
It’s really strange that anyone could consider the substance that is responsible for all life on earth, and the warm temperatures that support that life, as a “pollutant.” Of course, it’s even stranger that the “green” movement seeks to ban the substance that makes the planet green in the first place. Talk about anti-science.
Dose makes the poison. Suppose I had some massive industrial process that ups CO2 atmospheric concentrations to 5,000 ppm. That’s the starting point for CO2 being toxic to humans (ignoring that a bunch of wildlife would have already died by this point). Now CO2 is a pollutant even if it isn’t at current concentrations.
Oxygen is toxic as well. AFAIK the megafauna existed under CO2 levels much higher than on Earth today. At worst you would see an explosion of life with added CO2 rather than what is claimed.
Suppose I had some massive industrial process that ups CO2 atmospheric concentrations to 5,000 ppm
This massive industrial process doesn’t exist. Even creating it on purpose is problematic. How would humans benefit from this level of production of C02?
If it were a byproduct of an Obama crony’s “green” energy project, it would be mandatory.
Toxicity for humans is closer to 20,000 ppm. All life dies at something like 150 ppm. Which limit are we closer to?
I think the 111(b) argument is most likely to succeed. If the cost benefit analysis makes it clear that no new coal plants will be built under the proposed restrictions, then they will be unlikely to pass muster. In turn, the 111(d) will need to go back to the drawing board.
Seems like a rewrite of the statute to regulate CO2 as an area-source that must be criminalized. An 80% reduction would leave emissions at a level where people are breathing out one ton of CO2 per year and the rest of the economy can only emit 3 tons per person instead of 19.
And the margins on the Court to hear this just moved the wrong way:
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/us-world/article/Senior-Associate-Justice-Antonin-Scalia-found-6828930.php
“Associate Justice Antonin Scalia was found dead of apparent natural causes Saturday on a luxury resort in West Texas, federal officials said.”
Presumably Scalia’s was one of the five votes to stay the CPP; it must have been one of his last official acts.
RIP. We should all be so lucky as to do the work we love to the very last, and then die in our sleep.