Supreme Court 5 to 4: EPA Violated the Clean Air Act

The court ruled 5 to 4 that the Environmental Protection Agency violated theClean Air Act by improperly declining to regulate new-vehicle emissionsstandards to control the pollutants that scientists say contribute to globalwarming.

The Washington Post Reported: HighCourt Faults EPA Inaction on Emissions (This is a short article and worthreading)

"EPA has offered no reasoned explanation for its refusal to decidewhether greenhouse gases cause or contribute to climate change," JusticeJohn Paul Stevens wrote for the majority. The agency "identifies nothingsuggesting that Congress meant to curtail EPA's power to treat greenhouse gasesas air pollutants," the opinion continued.

The Natural Resources Defense Council said in a statement that the ruling"repudiates the Bush administration's do-nothing policy on globalwarming," undermining the government's refusal to view carbon dioxide as anair pollutant subject to EPA regulation.

Now let's not forget what Bush said in his 2007State of The Union Address some of which we have heard in prior State of The Union Address's

It's in our vital interest to diversifyAmerica's energy supply -- the way forward is through technology. We mustcontinue changing the way America generates electric power, by even greater useof clean coal technology, solar and wind energy, and clean, safe nuclear power.(Applause.) We need to press on with battery research for plug-in and hybridvehicles, and expand the use of clean diesel vehicles and biodiesel fuel.(Applause.) We must continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol --(applause) -- using everything from wood chips to grasses, to agriculturalwastes. 

America is on the verge of technological breakthroughs that will enable us  to live our lives less dependent on oil. And these technologies will help us  be better stewards of the environment, and they will help us to confront  the serious challenge of global climate change.

Mostof the extreme opposition of Global Warming, simply believe it is totally boulderdash,they do not even slightly entertain the idea. They throw out the handful ofnames of scientists that disagree (which most of them do not disagree with theentire issue, just with some of the theories)

Live Science has their take inan article SupremeCourt Rebukes Bush on Carbon Dioxide Policy and in another article theybreak down the reasons of skepticism on Global Warming WhyAmericans are Skeptical of Their Role in Global Warming. There are otherlinks associated with these articles, and I would encourage anyone to grab a cupof coffee, tea etc and take some time to read these.

Comments

[George]

This is very important. Hopefully this leads to an era of responsibility in the country.

[Tony]

I think we will continue to have the "hold outs", like the ones that think all is well in Iraq and the Administration. Hannity will start pointing out the hypocritical judges that drive SUV's and how much electric their home use.

[George]

You will always have the puppets like Hannity who are bank rolled by more powerful people to believe certain things. We just have to make their influence insignificant. Until he can tell me the downside of living my life assuming that global warming is real, then he is just noise.