Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court appeared reluctant Tuesday to allow a massive lawsuit by several states to proceed against private power companies whose greenhouse-gas emissions are accused of presenting a "public nuisance."
The environmental policy issue could have enormous implications on competing government efforts to control what many have claimed is major factor in global warming.
At issue is whether the federal courts can intervene and unilaterally establish targeted pollution emission levels, or whether federal government regulators should have the final say. Several justices worried that the scope of the problem and possible solutions might be too much for courts to tackle.
"The whole problem of dealing with global warming is that there are costs and benefits on both sides," said Chief Justice John Roberts, "and you have to determine how much you want to readjust the world economy to address global warming, and I think that's a pretty big burden to impose on a district court judge."
"Do you think that you have a federal common law cause of action against anybody in the world?" asked Justice Elena Kagan of the states' attorney. "Is there something that you think limits it to large emissions producers?"
The energy companies, backed by the Obama administration, say federal judges should not be setting environmental policy, especially on such a complex issue as clean air standards. The Environmental Protection Agency claims it has been actively working to beef up rules to control carbon dioxide emissions that cross over state lines from individual power plants.
But several states, backed by land trusts and environmental groups, have sued five private utilities and the federal Tennessee Valley Authority, saying U.S. authorities have not been aggressive enough in curbing emissions, which they say has led to increased smog, soaring temperatures and loss of forests and cropland.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/04/19/scotus.greenhouse.gasses/index.html?iref=allsearch
No comments:
Post a Comment