Supreme Court acknowledges Global Warming
Back in January I discussed the implications of warm weather in DC for the Supreme Court's decision in Massachusetts v. EPA. The Court issued its decision today, with a 5-4 verdict in favor of the Plaintiffs. Here is a link. The Court acknowledges that Global Warming is occurring:
This is a huge victory for the environmental movement. It will be interesting to see whether people begin to acknowledge the legitimacy of climate change. I'll think of something profound to say about this later.
The harms associated with climate change are serious and well recognized. The Government’s own objective assessment of the relevant science and a strong consensus among qualified experts in-dicate that global warming threatens, inter alia, a precipitate rise insea levels, severe and irreversible changes to natural ecosystems, a significant reduction in winter snowpack with direct and important economic consequences, and increases in the spread of disease and the ferocity of weather events.
This is a huge victory for the environmental movement. It will be interesting to see whether people begin to acknowledge the legitimacy of climate change. I'll think of something profound to say about this later.
posted by Austin 5-000 at 10:56 AM
2 Comments:
It would be a huge victory if there were a "non-ideological" consensus that Supreme Court Decisions are infallible declarations of truth, but, no, such a creature does not exist. Have you not noticed the controversy over, say, Roe v. Wade? It is still going on. The American People don't regard court decisions as Holy Writ. Not even unanimous decisions, and this one was 5-4. Also, the court itself has with its infamous Sweet Mystery of Life Clause declared the concept of supraindividual truth to be unconstitutional, thereby relegating its own declarations to the realm of subjectivity. This is no accident for liberal regimes are necessarily prisoners of relativism.
But even if all this were not the case and the court still had credibility on a non-idealogical level as a mouthpiece of objective truth, what you cited still won't satisfy the environmentalists for the question that the ostrich conservatives say is still up for debate is not one of global warming, but whether or no it is the result of the greenhouse effect, Even an idiot like Bush has acknowledged (repeated, in fact) that global warming is taking place.
I meant to put "non-ideological level" in shudder quotes and should have written "repeatedly" instead of "repeated". Sorry.
Post a Comment
<< Home