 |
 |
|
The Court ruled that it's time for the EPA to take action regarding global warming. |
The Bush administration also feels that since these gas emissions are slated to spike in the near future due to countries such as India and China, it would be pointless to try and make a difference in the level of greenhouse emissions here in the U.S. However, Justice John Paul Stevens disagrees.
"A reduction in domestic emissions would slow the pace of global emissions increases, no matter what happens elsewhere," he wrote in the Court's opinion.
The Supreme Court's ruling is music to the ears of many people throughout the nation who have felt that the EPA has been given the power to be a major combatant in the fight to stop global warming, but has not been using its power.
Other justices besides Stevens that were in disagreement included Justice Roberts, Justice Alito, Justice Antonin Scalia, and Justice Clarence Thomas.
While the Court found that Massachusetts is already suffering from the affects of global warming due to greenhouse-gas emissions (which can be seen in its disappearing coast lines), Justice Roberts feels that there is no connection between Massachusetts' coast line and global warming.
The Court also ruled last Monday that Duke Energy Corp. will be required to meet new and improved standards regarding harmful emissions. The case was Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corp., and the decision was unanimous.
"This is a huge win for clean air," Environmental Defense President Fred Krupp said in a statement to the Legal Times. "The Court ruled unanimously that companies have to use the latest cost effective technology to reduce pollution when they upgrade their plants. This is not a legal abstraction—it means we'll have cleaner air and less childhood asthma."
|
