Supreme court EPA decision..

[Bande]

Some with Brains.
Great decision.

[Blkfyre]

Some with Brains.
Great decision.

I like how the title of the video says "Dangerous decision" but conservatives say it's a great decision...

[Hobby]

It's a CBS affiliate reporting which is left-wing news media.  This is what the left-wing media does. Right now all the energy and as much that can be produced in the US is needed.  What the ruling does is stop the EPA from independently setting caps on emissions.  The US has restrictions on emissions that far exceed other countries such as China and Russia...but the news report won't mention this.  They only want to say how this ruling could affect the Green People and Biden.

[Danno]

the other ruling today is to limit indians sovereignty. 6 people taking the country back 200 yrs. 3 that lied to get confirmed.
they must of got wind that indians where getting guns

[HighStepper]

The issue before the court was how the EPA can regulate coal-fired power plants, which in this country are the single largest source of carbon emissions that cause climate challenge. The Supreme Court turned thumbs down on any such systemic approach. Bringing to life what the court has called "the major questions doctrine," the court said that neither the EPA nor any other agency may adopt rules that are transformational to the economy--unless Congress has specifically authorized such a rule to address a specific problem, like climate change. Link

So we now must depend on a dysfunctional Congress to make sensible regulations relative to the coal industry impact on climate change. Good luck with that.

Happy day for the Koch family. Their heavy investment in politics has paid off.

[Hobby]

The issue before the court was how the EPA can regulate coal-fired power plants, which in this country are the single largest source of carbon emissions that cause climate challenge. The Supreme Court turned thumbs down on any such systemic approach. Bringing to life what the court has called "the major questions doctrine," the court said that neither the EPA nor any other agency may adopt rules that are transformational to the economy--unless Congress has specifically authorized such a rule to address a specific problem, like climate change. Link


So we now must depend on a dysfunctional Congress to make sensible regulations relative to the coal industry impact on climate change. Good luck with that.

Happy day for the Koch family. Their heavy investment in politics has paid off.

Dysfunctional or not our representatives will decide not a Democrat packed EPA making the decisions.

[Blkfyre]

Dysfunctional or not our representatives will decide not a Democrat packed EPA making the decisions.

Yet again packed is a horrible thing, except when it comes to a republican Supreme Court and then they are just doing what needs to be done! Lol

[HighStepper]

Dysfunctional or not our representatives will decide not a Democrat packed EPA making the decisions.

Over 15,000 people work at the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) from a wide variety of backgrounds. For the most part they are government employees bound by the Hatch Act that restricts political activity.

President Richard Nixon in 1970 established the EPA to address widespread public concerns about air pollution and water pollution. When Congress enacts environmental laws the EPA writes regulations. Such as the Clean Air Act that direct the EPA to regulate pollutants that endanger human health. The issue addressed by the Supreme Court is if the Clean Air Act can be used to combat climate change.

"Packing" is a misnomer. The appointed directors are the ones with influence. Such as when Anne M. Gorsuch [Burford] (yes that's his mother) wanted to gut the EPA.