A landmark decision concerning car companies and global warming was handed down by a federal judge in California on Monday. Yet, most people are likely not going to hear about it, because the ruling goes counter to the media's agenda.
As reported by the Associated Press (emphasis added throughout): "District Judge Martin Jenkins in San Francisco handed California Attorney General Jerry Brown's environmental crusade a stinging rebuke when he ruled that it [sic] impossible to determine to what extent automakers are responsible for global-warming damages in California."
How delicious. But, there was much more about this decision the press will likely keep from people outside of California:
"The court is left without guidance in determining what is an unreasonable contribution to the sum of carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere, or in determining who should bear the costs associated with global climate change that admittedly result from multiple sources around the globe," Jenkins write.
The judge also ruled that keeping the lawsuit alive would threaten the country's foreign policy position.
[...]
"President George W. Bush opposes the protocol because it exempts developing nations who are major emitters, fails to address two major pollutants, and would have a negative economic impact on the United States," Jenkins wrote in his 24-page decision. To rule in favor of California would undermine the administration's position, Jenkins said.
Jenkins said it's up to lawmakers, rather than judges, to determine how responsible automakers are for global warming problems.
Jenkins ruled that a court "injecting itself into the global warming thicket at this juncture would require an initial policy determination of the type reserved for the political branches of government."
As you might imagine, this is a huge loss to the leftwing in this nation always hoping to legislate from the bench.
Maybe more importantly, as what happens in California very often sets the trend for the rest of the nation, this decision has far-reaching implications for global warming lawsuits around the country.
I guess that explains why media will likely bury this ruling.
For those interested in reading the judge's entire opinion, please go here.
*****Update: Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute cautions that there are many lawsuits out there against the automakers, and that just recently, a federal judge in Vermont ruled against them. Please read more here. Thanks, Myron.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Holy sanity, Batman!
September 17, 2007 - 23:21 ET by SeptemberI guess they aren't as crazy as I thought they were in California. Is there hope?
Stay tuned, America! The Moriarty of the West, Jerry Brown, has met his match.
Thanks, Noel. Such good news. I think I'm in love with you now. ;)
Such wonderful news
September 17, 2007 - 23:36 ET by Cape ConservativeAND from California! Are you sure you got the facts right???
A judge decided to USE existing laws to determine a ruling, not to MAKE NEW LAWS???
As a Massachusetts resident, I have a hard time believing that!
Jerry Brown should be disbarred.
September 17, 2007 - 23:39 ET by Dave RGiven that the prevailing winds in California run primarily west to east off the Pacific, perhaps Jerry would have better luck filing a class-action suit against drivers in Honolulu.
This is a prime example of why I support a loser-pays system. Jerry Brown, who is nuts from the ground up, should have his bar card yanked for filing such a ridiculous action. He should then be forced to pay back the California taxpayers out of his own pocket.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
I don't know, Dave. I
September 17, 2007 - 23:52 ET by MikeBI don't know, Dave. I think that this whole thing could have been decided without recourse to the court system. In the first instance, when Jerry Brown brought suit against the power generation companies, I think every generation facility outside the state of California should have immediately severed the lines leading into California, depriving California of electricity generated outside the state. Then, all the coal suppliers should have refused to sell any grade of coal to generation stations inside the state of California. Then, all oil and gas pipeline into the state of California should have been shut down. If Jerry and the econazis are truly concerned with carbon dioxide emissions, then they don't need electricity.
Now, every auto manufacturer should close down any assembly plants in California and close down all of their dealerships in California. Airlines should cancel all flights into California. U.S. companies should tell Jerry and all Californians that they agree with Jerry, and they wouldn't think of contributing any carbon to the eco-economy of California. Once Sacramento and Hollywood can no longer run their air conditioners, perhaps sanity can break out in the entire state. Certainly, the voters of California would throw the idiots out of office. Of course, porcine-americans will discover and utilize laws of aerodynamics before that happens.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Mike, LOL-Damn, you are a man after my own heart.
September 18, 2007 - 00:27 ET by Dave RThat would be a very entertaining scenario, there. Just seeing the eco-nazis bluff finally being called would be priceless.
LOL-Only problem is, if all that happens, when Noel's emergency generator runs out of fuel, the only way he will be able to post articles here at NB will be to pedal the generator (or have his daughter do it).
BTW-Your comment reminded me of the EU giving MicroSoft some more BS that I read about today on Drudge. As I read through the story, I kept thinking what a hoot it would be if Bill Gates got so fed up that he pulled his people out, gave the EU the finger, then had his people change the access codes as they left.
The EU would grind to a halt within a very short time. Now that would be funny.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
I wonder if Noel has PV
September 18, 2007 - 09:55 ET by dscottI wonder if Noel has PV panels on his house? We may have to take up a collection to keep him on the internet. http://www.diynetwork.com/diy/he_diagnostics/article/0,2037,DIY_13893_2277457,00.html
dscott's postulate: The degree to which someone exaggerates or deceives is inversely proportional to the merit of the advocated position.
There is one national
September 18, 2007 - 08:22 ET by danboThere is one national bakery that has announced that it will close it's bakeries in California. And cease selling bread there. After all. CO2 is produced during the bread making process.
To take liberties with Marie Antoinettes words. If they don't like CO2. Let them eat tofu.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
So Nevada and Arizona
September 18, 2007 - 08:24 ET by danboSo Nevada and Arizona should sue the State of California. For shipping their CO2 to them.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
IT IS SO ORDERED
September 18, 2007 - 00:05 ET by krismcsherryMike B: Heavens, yes! If your scenario were to actually occur then that would be a huge wake-up call to the commoners around here as to what's going on in politics and the courts concerning THEIR energy needs. I almost wish it would happen.
A couple of my fav quotes from the decision:
“In addressing Congress’s power over national and foreign commerce, the Court notes that recognizing such a new and unprecedented federal common law nuisance claim for damages would likely have commerce implications in the other States by potentially exposing automakers, utility companies, and other industries to damages flowing from a new judicially created tort for doing nothing more than lawfully engaging in their respective spheres of commerce within those States.”
And:
“Additionally, the cases cited by Plaintiff do not provide the Court with legal framework or applicable standards upon which to allocate fault or damages, if any, in this case. The Court is left without guidance in determining what is an unreasonable contribution to the sum of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere, or in determining who should bear the costs associated with the global climate change that admittedly result from multiple sources around the globe. Plaintiff has failed to provide convincing legal authority to support its proposition that the legal framework for assessing global warming nuisance damages is well-established.”
I do wonder what the court considers "multiple sources". And it seems Brown is after the people of California as much as the automakers. What a twit. A freakin' menace.
One would think, clearly on
September 18, 2007 - 09:45 ET by dscottOne would think, clearly on it's face that this suit was in violation of the Commerce Clause since what they are demanding affects interstate commerce. Only Congress has the right to legislate a solution, the States have no right to demand anything that affects the production of products in other States. It's quite another thing if kooky Brown demands Californians to live in the Stone Age. Or is that the plan for CA to meet it's self imposed CO2 emissions targets, reduce the GDP of their economy? So when everyone starts leaving the State to find a job and electricity elsewhere, they automatically take their CO2 emitting behavior with them? What Brown attempted to do is cut off the inevitable public response of voting with their feet by imposing his agenda on the whole country.
dscott's postulate: The degree to which someone exaggerates or deceives is inversely proportional to the merit of the advocated position.
It's a District Court ruling
September 18, 2007 - 00:07 ET by scamoramaand that means Jerry can appeal it to the Ninth Circuit, where all bets are off.
Even if he won in the Ninth
September 18, 2007 - 00:26 ET by MikeBEven if he won in the Ninth Circus, it would be appealed to the Supreme Court, where he would lose. The Ninth is the most reversed appeals court in the country. I wouldn't worry about it unless Hillary or one of the other communists - er, Democratics- gets the Whitehouse and gets to appoint a Supreme Court justice. Then I'd worry.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
California Uber Alles (where's the umlaut key?)
September 18, 2007 - 01:06 ET by mastersofdeceitNoel thanks for this. As a California resident I've had my ear tuned to this one for some time. I knew when the court ruled NB would more than likely cover it.
I'm no legal eagle but looking at the ruling how can a plaintiff just be "the people of the state of California"? On pg. 2 it says " According to Plaintiff, the 'scientific debate is over'.." I'm a person of ca I've never said that! Can I counter sue? : )
Also this suit was filed by Bill Lockyer; but Brown made it clear during the election that he would continue the lawsuit. People are already bringing up the 9th circuit, supremes etc. I agree it will be interesting to see how it plays out, but look at one of the last paragraphs in the article, Browns already been a bull in a china shop:
" Brown has successfully sued SanBernadino County to add a carbon emissions reduction scheme in its
revised general plan. Last week, he wrested a $10 million agreementfrom oil giant ConocoPhillips Co. to reduce or offset its carbon
output. Brown also has sent threatening letters to about a dozen state
agencies demanding they take climate change into account when making development plans."
Whoa! I guess you really dont' mess with President Brown!
" Big Bro' on white horse is near "
Polar Bear die off?
September 18, 2007 - 09:03 ET by danboBad news for the warmers on Polar bears. Numbers of polar bears are growing in the Davis Strait area. In a report to come out next year. The present estimate of 850 has gone to a count of 3000.
Warmers have some difficulty moving from models to reality.
Source
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
CO2
September 18, 2007 - 11:17 ET by ScottyDogThis is the same thing that the lawyers did with the tobacco companies. I am glad the judge threw it out and the same thing should have happened with the tobacco companies.
I live in California and the legislature mandated a new tier energy billing system in our wonderful state where you are penalized for using over what they consider normal energy usage that completely ignore the size of your house ect.
Last month, I was billed $600.00 for electricity under the new plan (scheme) because I exceeded their base usage tier for electricity. Last year I paid less than $250.00 for same usage.
This is what the global warming hoax is all about…extracting more money to force you to live as we did back in the 1800’s.
Don't celebrate just yet as this is coming your city. Do a google on tiered energy billing. When I called to complain to the city council, they told me this was to reduce green house gases causing global warming.
Arnold had a chance to veto this stupidity but allowed it to pass.
BTW-When was CO2 proved to cause global warming? Did I miss something?
Is this Mexico or the USA
A funny video. The ultimate
September 18, 2007 - 12:10 ET by danboA funny video. The ultimate global warming challenge. Can you save Al Gore?
Here
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT