The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Not only are there 20-something state attorneys general litigating against Obamacare, but now 22 of them have weighed in on a landmark lawsuit in which an electric utility has sought relief from the Supreme Court over eight Northeastern states' attempt to regulate greenhouse gases via a public nuisance lawsuit. And the AGs are backing the utility -- American Electric Power Company -- not their Northeastern colleagues:

Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt and Missouri counterpart Chris Koster joined 20 other attorneys general in filing a "friend of the court" brief to the U.S. Supreme Court imploring it render greenhouse regulation a political question rather than one solved by litigation.

The brief is sent to the court in an attempt to convince justices, but it has no binding effect. The brief said lawsuits seeking past damages for greenhouse gas emissions and injunctions against future emissions undercut state regulatory guidelines crafted by elected officials.

In a press release, Schmidt identified how the nuisance suit could affect every state in the country:

"Kansas has a large stake in the outcome of this litigation," Schmidt said. "An adverse ruling by the Supreme Court could further expose large parts of our state's economy - from agriculture to manufacturing to petrochemical refining - to further job-killing regulation by litigation."

Should those Northeast lawyers succeed in convincing the Justices that bureaucrats can regulate mammalian exhalants (carbon dioxide) based on a "nuisance," then no one can escape the regulatory whims of government.

topics:
Global Warming, Climate Change, Greenhouse Gases

View all comments (4) | Leave a comment

Russell Cook| 2.9.11 @ 5:41PM

I've already emailed my praise to AG Schmidt, along with the suggestion to consider one other massive problem with GHG nuuisance lawsuits, that they depend on an unreliable source to say skeptic climate scientists are corrupt - see my article, "Global Warming Nuisance Lawsuits Are Based on a Fatal Flaw" http://biggovernment.com/rcook.....atal-flaw/

Real American| 2.9.11 @ 6:46PM

You know what's a big nuisance? Democrats and their idiotic policies.

bobmontgomery| 2.9.11 @ 7:32PM

So the argument that if the government can regulate inhalants, they can regulate anything ...is quite similar to the argument that if the government can force you to purchase something, it can force you to do anything (or criminalize anything)? Seems the federal judge striking down Obamacare would be a good one to refer to when arguing this case.

bobmontgomery| 2.9.11 @ 7:34PM

I meant exhalants; you all knew that.

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

Related Blog Posts

More Blog Posts by Paul Chesser

http://spectator.org/blog/2011/02/09/ags-band-together-on-climate-t

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

Special Feature

Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:

A Time for Choosing

James Piereson

The Road from Serfdom

Stephen Moore and Peter Ferrara

FLASHBACK TO: 1984

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Meet the Flukes!

F. H. Buckley | 5.25.12

The Wisconsin Turning Point

Peter Ferrara | 5.23.12

In Search of Muhammad

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi | 5.25.12

Age and Kyl

Quin Hillyer | 5.25.12

Follow Me

Jay D. Homnick | 5.25.12

A Test of National Honor

Hal G.P. Colebatch | 5.25.12

How About the Record of DOE Capital?

William Tucker | 5.25.12

The Great Debate

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.24.12

ADVERTISEMENT