On Thursday, the Supreme Court's ruling that unelected federal bureaucrats would limit their authority to regulate us all this term, following. This is the second most important event decided. Reversal of the Roe v. Wade case.
The Constitution has set up a system of separation of powers, assuming that Congress will pass the law, the President will control them, and the courts will interpret them. Since the New Deal, Congress has increasingly weakened its accountability by empowering non-elected institutions to makeenormous economic and political importance decisions.
The West Virginia Environmental Protection Agency ruled that a 6 to 3 majority would require Congress to explicitly grant such authority in the future.The court has created its own form of law in the guise of regulation, stopping the hellish expansion of the runaway bureaucracy. It is up to voters to elect those who regain that power to Congress.
The problem in court is that the EPA will reduce the amount of energy it produces for public use in coal-fired power plants, orbillions of dollars in new facilities that use alternative energy sources. Was it possible to force them to spend?In both scenarios,energy costs increase dramatically in the name of fighting carbon emissions.
The Obama administration, and now the Biden administration, pursued a radical climate strategy. This strategy encourages agencies to adopt new interpretations of federal law to combat climate change. As Judge John Roberts pointed out, the EPA has claimed the right to reduce emissionsby using a method that "congress has already considered and rejected many times." rice field. In other words, the EPA was trying to replace the rule of law with bureaucratic rules.
Supreme Court blocks this seize of power More than expected by many observers who moved further to do. Judge Neil Gorsuch, in his explanatory consent, presented a test of future cases that the court could use to determine what constitutes an appropriate statement of Congressional intent. He wants to challenge other federal agencies with a wide range of rules, whether the car needs to bemore fuel efficient or the Federal Communications Commission'snet neutrality regulation. Effectively provided a roadmap for.
Democrats and environmental left have been twisted andsince President Barack Obama's remarkable failure to even win the Senate's voting rights in 2010. I'm obsessed with it. Distort the old lawand achieve backdoors that a legitimate constitutional approach can never do.
Now that the Supreme Court has begun closing the doors of fraudulent federal agencies,environmental militants are acting likethieves, trying to open all possible doors in the neighborhood. increase.
Influential Head of Climate Pressure Organization , Bill McKibben 350.orgpromotes ESG movement to judge corporate performance based on environmental, social and governance indicators, limitingto businesses Explains why you were forced to impose. Climate control.
"Convincing banks to stop fundingbig oilis probably the most efficient way to tackle the climate crisis. No, but in countries with democratic politics, options are effectively closed and may be the only way left, "he wrote in New Yorker.
McKibben says that climate militants will not reach the ballot box and will adopt theESG approach. It is modeled after a union tactic called a "company." motion. "Under that, the union pressures the company to follow the union's policy or faces damage to the company's reputation and alienation from employees advertised.bears immediate costs. Many companies are giving up because they don't mind. Elon Musk sadly sees Tesla removed from the ESG company's "approved" list, and ESG is "weaponed by a fake social justice warrior." Was made. " scam. "
Thursday's Supreme Court ruling gives hope that federal agencies can stop rampaging in rulemaking. Americans, as the Constitution envisions. , The issue of climate change must be determined through arepresentative elected by Congress
The next challenge is to force a dramatic increase in energy costs "banks, assets". Pressure on managers and insurers ”threatens the United States ofcompaniesClimate radicalsare on the road to entering the back door, but not happening Hmm.
John Fund is a columnist for National Review magazine.
