Why you should care about the Supreme Court's global warming decision
By

    If you subscribe to the wisdom that a trend isn’t cool until the Supreme Court gets involved, then global warming has finally made it. Sure, it was kind of hip when Al Gore released that documentary, Leonardo DiCaprio made it pretty cool and Happy Feet gave it a certain allure. But in deciding Commonwealth of Massachusetts et al. v. Environmental Protecion Agency et al., the Supreme Court has officially made global warming a big trend.

    This decision marks the first time the Court has tackled the issue, taking up a case that started in 1999. The International Center for Technology Assessment, a non-profit that investigates technology’s impact on society, petitioned the EPA to set emission standards on new vehicles. The EPA took four years to churn out a simple “no,” adding that they didn’t have the authority to regulate greenhouse gases and even if they did, there are still “numerous areas of scientific uncertainty” about global warming. The state of Massachusetts wasn’t so hot on that response, so it sued the EPA.

    Last Monday, the Court ruled in favor of the environmentalists, saying that the EPA gave no explanation for its refusal to act even though it had the power to do so. The case itself doesn’t really mean that much, but it was a big finger-wagging at the Bush administration for its negligence on regulating greenhouse gases. It also gives a lot of political momentum to environmental lobbyists, who can ally themselves with Democrats in Congress to provoke movement on a national level.

    Michigan Democrat John D. Dingell, who heads the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said in a statement that he expected more action from Congress on the issue.

    “Today’s ruling provides another compelling reason why Congress must enact, and the President must sign, comprehensive climate change legislation,” Dingell said.

    Several states, including Illinois, have taken initiative in limiting greenhouse gases, but many analysts say the federal government has to do their share before any real change will happen. The Supreme Court must have been listening, since this case puts real pressure on the EPA to listen to future petitions. It also gives House Democrats the perfect in for getting a hearing on their energy legislation, which they promise to get passed by July 4.

    In short, expect national-level Green Cup-style action to cut down on emissions and protect the environment. Don’t worry, the restrictions will likely only apply to industrial plants. But it wouldn’t hurt you to keep your lights off a little longer. After all, it’s the hot thing to do.

    Comments

    blog comments powered by Disqus
    Please read our Comment Policy.