U.S. Supreme Court to Weigh in on Global Warming
by Eric Kane, New York, NY 
on 06.29.06
Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to decide whether the EPA is required to regulate vehicle emissions of carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act. The case in question, Massachusetts v. EPA centers on the issue of whether carbon dioxide and other gases, present a risk to public health. In July 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled against Massachusetts (who is joined by 11 other states, three cities, and a several environmental organizations) in a decision that stated: the EPA is only required to regulate emissions which can reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. Subsequently, the Court of Appeals upheld the EPA's decision not to regulate carbon dioxide based on the opinion that scientific evidence linking the gas to global warming was uncertain. The case will be added to the Supreme Court’s fall schedule. Given the Court’s recent decision on wetlands, it is unlikely that the majority will rule in favor of regulation. See also ::Samuel Alito & The Environment and ::Off-Grid Man Jailed For Confronting Utility Company. Update: ::Update: Massachusetts v. EPA
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Take it from a Beatle: Cut Your Carbon Footprint by Making Mondays Meat-Free
- How to Cool Your Vehicle Quickly During the Intense Summer Heat and Reduce Your Carbon Emissions
- Green Glossary: Carbon Sink
- Eat a Vegetarian Diet, Reduce Your Carbon Footprint by a Ton
- Does Recycling Really Make a Difference?
- Trust Stella McCartney: Meat-Free Mondays are Hip, not Hippie!
There is a perfect storm brewing over energy policy, driven by this legislature and being fueled by Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" like a warmed up ocean fuels up a hurricane. :::[Could US energy politics go Category Five?]