Page 1 of 1

More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up....

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:52 am
by UpstateSCHokie
....do these people see themselves as serious / professional people? This is like something you'd get from a mock trial run by a class of 3rd graders with no understanding of the law. Seriously, there is something fundamentally wrong with our judge appointment process when decisions like this can get made in a federal court. Appalling.

Pssst 9th circuit, there is no "constitutional right to a stable climate." Full stop.

===================================================

The Ninth Circuit Just Allowed Children To Sue Trump Over Global Warming
Michael Bastasch
10:43 PM 03/07/2018

A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday in favor of 21 children and young adults suing the U.S. government for not doing enough to protect their constitutional right to a stable climate.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals judges refused to grant mandamus relief and block the U.S. District Court in Oregon from hearing the suit, which was originally filed by the environmental group Our Children’s Trust in 2015.

A federal judge in Oregon ruled in 2016 the 21 youngsters had standing to sue. President Donald Trump’s administration and oil and gas groups appealed the decision in June 2017. They asked judges to “end this clearly improper attempt to have the judiciary decide important questions of energy and environmental policy” and upset the balance of powers. The Ninth Circuit disagreed.

“There is enduring value in the orderly administration of litigation by the trial courts, free of needless appellate interference,” Judge Sidney Thomas wrote on behalf of the court.

“If appellate review could be invoked whenever a district court denied a motion to dismiss, we would be quickly overwhelmed with such requests, and the resolution of cases would be unnecessarily delayed,” Thomas wrote.

The ruling is a victory for environmental activists seeking to use the courts to force the Trump administration to issue regulations to phase out fossil fuels. Julia Olson, Our Children’s Trust chief counsel, said the ruling gives a “green light for trial.”

Olson’s case on behalf of youngsters argues constitutional rights to life, liberty and property are being violated by the federal government’s failure to enact policies to stop catastrophic global warming.

Plaintiffs say the right to a stable climate comes from the public trust doctrine — the idea certain natural resources should be protected for enjoyment of future generations. Policies to encourage coal, oil and natural gas use violate this principle, plaintiffs argue.

Our Children’s Trust argues global warming has harmed the youths they represent and will continue to harm them in the future. The government should move “to ensure that atmospheric CO2 is no more concentrated than 350 [parts per million] by 2100 … to stabilize the climate system,” the trust’s complaint demands.

Is there a constitutional right to a stable climate? Can the federal government actually guarantee such a right, even if there is?

“Courts in at least two states have recognized that the public trust doctrine applies to climate change under their state laws — New Mexico and Washington,” Sabin Center for Climate Change Law Executive Director Michael Burger told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“Here, the federal district court judge found that a federal public trust doctrine can apply,” Burger said but is not part of the lawsuit.

Applying the public trust doctrine to global warming was a way to “circumvent unfavorable political outcomes with legal actions, which runs afoul of non-justiciability limitations,” a 2014 Dartmouth Law Review article by Andrew Ballentine argued.

The Ninth Circuit panel recognized “some of the plaintiffs’ claims as currently pleaded are quite broad, and some of the remedies the plaintiffs seek may not be available as redress,” which would need to be narrowed through litigation.

Anti-fossil-fuel environmental foundations support Our Children’s Trust. The Daily Caller News Foundation found in late 2017 the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation are among those that support the group.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/03/07/globa ... it-oregon/

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:43 pm
by awesome guy
Liberalism is a mental disorder

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:01 pm
by CFB Apologist
Where is "climate" in the bill of rights? Can someone point me to it, please? Thanks

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:37 pm
by cwtcr hokie
It is impossible to make up the stupidity that is going on these days

"Constitutional right to a stable climate"

WTF!!!!!

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:40 pm
by awesome guy
cwtcr hokie wrote:It is impossible to make up the stupidity that is going on these days

"Constitutional right to a stable climate"

WTF!!!!!
They're turning into Egyptians and will sue Ra, the sun God for causing climate change.

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:08 pm
by HokieJoe
:roll:

This underlines the vacuous hubris of their parents and teachers. Yes kids, the U.S. is a Marvel character who can save the world from mythological demons like climate change. It's true! If only Trump wasn't like Lex Luther...Sigh

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:06 pm
by ip_law-hokie
Good stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:52 pm
by Jack Galt
They should sue Barack Obama personally. He violated their "Constitutional right to a stable climate", whatever that is, when he personally failed to reverse "climate change ". There is video evidence of this. To paraphrase, "This is the day the waters begin to recede and the Earth begins to cool", or some such nonsense. Obama promised that. Trump never made such a promise as far as I can remember.

ip: "Good stuff "

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:50 pm
by HokieJoe
Jack Galt wrote:They should sue Barack Obama personally. He violated their "Constitutional right to a stable climate", whatever that is, when he personally failed to reverse "climate change ". There is video evidence of this. To paraphrase, "This is the day the waters begin to recede and the Earth begins to cool", or some such nonsense. Obama promised that. Trump never made such a promise as far as I can remember.

ip: "Good stuff "
He sure did.

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:34 pm
by ip_law-hokie
HokieJoe wrote:
Jack Galt wrote:They should sue Barack Obama personally. He violated their "Constitutional right to a stable climate", whatever that is, when he personally failed to reverse "climate change ". There is video evidence of this. To paraphrase, "This is the day the waters begin to recede and the Earth begins to cool", or some such nonsense. Obama promised that. Trump never made such a promise as far as I can remember.

ip: "Good stuff "
He sure did.
There's rhetoric and there's policy.

You could argue that Obama's didn't push for more aggressive policy towards climate change. I doubt you could argue it honestly, but you could argue it.

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 1:26 pm
by USN_Hokie
ip_law-hokie wrote:Good stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is why everyone treats you as a troll and a poster not to be taken seriously.

If you have a legitimate, defensible position on this I think we would all love to hear it

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:04 pm
by 133743Hokie
ip_law-hokie wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
Jack Galt wrote:They should sue Barack Obama personally. He violated their "Constitutional right to a stable climate", whatever that is, when he personally failed to reverse "climate change ". There is video evidence of this. To paraphrase, "This is the day the waters begin to recede and the Earth begins to cool", or some such nonsense. Obama promised that. Trump never made such a promise as far as I can remember.

ip: "Good stuff "
He sure did.
There's rhetoric and there's policy.

You could argue that Obama's didn't push for more aggressive policy towards climate change. I doubt you could argue it honestly, but you could argue it.
Regarding immigration, the court has ruled against trump based on his rhetoric. So you want to rethink that?

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:12 pm
by ip_law-hokie
133743Hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
Jack Galt wrote:They should sue Barack Obama personally. He violated their "Constitutional right to a stable climate", whatever that is, when he personally failed to reverse "climate change ". There is video evidence of this. To paraphrase, "This is the day the waters begin to recede and the Earth begins to cool", or some such nonsense. Obama promised that. Trump never made such a promise as far as I can remember.

ip: "Good stuff "
He sure did.
There's rhetoric and there's policy.

You could argue that Obama's didn't push for more aggressive policy towards climate change. I doubt you could argue it honestly, but you could argue it.
Regarding immigration, the court has ruled against trump based on his rhetoric. So you want to rethink that?
Rethink what? Obama’s global warming policy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:04 pm
by Major Kong
I would think that "man made global warming proponents" would be schitting bricks at the thought of an actual trial with full disclosure of data.

As far as a stable climate I would LOVE to see a court decide what is stable and every time we get a 100 year event let the lawsuits begin :!: :mrgreen:

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 6:12 pm
by HokieFanDC
Major Kong wrote:I would think that "man made global warming proponents" would be schitting bricks at the thought of an actual trial with full disclosure of data.

As far as a stable climate I would LOVE to see a court decide what is stable and every time we get a 100 year event let the lawsuits begin :!: :mrgreen:
Agreed. All the 9th Circuit did was refuse to stop the lower court from trying the case. Seems like the right choice, and will be interesting to see their evidence and how the courts react to it.

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 6:16 pm
by ip_law-hokie
USN_Hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:Good stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is why everyone treats you as a troll and a poster not to be taken seriously.

If you have a legitimate, defensible position on this I think we would all love to hear it
I'm a supporter of the public trust doctrine. I'm not alone. AG is too.

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 2:59 am
by 133743Hokie
ip_law-hokie wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
Jack Galt wrote:They should sue Barack Obama personally. He violated their "Constitutional right to a stable climate", whatever that is, when he personally failed to reverse "climate change ". There is video evidence of this. To paraphrase, "This is the day the waters begin to recede and the Earth begins to cool", or some such nonsense. Obama promised that. Trump never made such a promise as far as I can remember.

ip: "Good stuff "
He sure did.
There's rhetoric and there's policy.

You could argue that Obama's didn't push for more aggressive policy towards climate change. I doubt you could argue it honestly, but you could argue it.
Regarding immigration, the court has ruled against trump based on his rhetoric. So you want to rethink that?
Rethink what? Obama’s global warming policy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Rethink your inference that rhetoric doesn't matter (Obama), only policy

Re: More evidence that the 9th circuit should be busted up..

Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 4:07 am
by ip_law-hokie
133743Hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
Jack Galt wrote:They should sue Barack Obama personally. He violated their "Constitutional right to a stable climate", whatever that is, when he personally failed to reverse "climate change ". There is video evidence of this. To paraphrase, "This is the day the waters begin to recede and the Earth begins to cool", or some such nonsense. Obama promised that. Trump never made such a promise as far as I can remember.

ip: "Good stuff "
He sure did.
There's rhetoric and there's policy.

You could argue that Obama's didn't push for more aggressive policy towards climate change. I doubt you could argue it honestly, but you could argue it.
Regarding immigration, the court has ruled against trump based on his rhetoric. So you want to rethink that?
Rethink what? Obama’s global warming policy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Rethink your inference that rhetoric doesn't matter (Obama), only policy
OK. Point awarded, I suppose.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk