So the question is, just how low will activists stoop? We predict that eventually Gina McCarthy will say “we are compelled by law to take stronger action”, just as Lisa Jackson did with Massachusetts vs EPA.
From RTCC:
This week a group of young Americans aged 8-19 filed a lawsuit against the US Federal Government to demand greater action on climate change.
The 21 young plaintiffs sought an order from the District Court of Oregon, requiring Obama to implement a national plan for the reduction of atmospheric concentrations of CO2 to 350 ppm by the year 2100.
This is in line with the international target to keep warming below 2 degrees on pre-industrial levels.
The Complaint, submitted on Wednesday to to coincide with International Youth Day, further accuses Obama and the Federal Government of knowingly risking “harm to human life, liberty and property” through intensive fossil fuel use.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF OREGON
EUGENE DIVISION
Plaintiffs include amongst the many and their guardians:
SOPHIE K., through her Guardian Dr. James Hansen;
EARTH GUARDIANS, a nonprofit organization; and FUTURE GENERATIONS, through their Guardian Dr. James Hansen
vs.
The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;
BARACK OBAMA, in his official capacity as President of the United States;
The OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES;
CHRISTY GOLDFUSS, in her official capacity as Director of Council on Environmental Quality;
SHAUN DONOVAN, in his official capacity as Director of the Office of Management and Budget;
DR. JOHN HOLDREN, in his official capacity as Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy;
The UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY;
DR. ERNEST MONIZ, in his official capacity as Secretary of Energy;
The UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR;
SALLY JEWELL, in her official capacity as Secretary of Interior;
The UNITEDSTATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION;
ANTHONY FOXX, in his official capacity as Secretary of Transportation;
The UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE;
THOMAS J. VILSACK, in his official capacity as Secretary of Agriculture;
The UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE;
PENNY PRITZKER, in her official capacity as Secretary of Commerce;
The UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE;
ASHTON CARTER, in his official capacity as Secretary of Defense;
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE;
JOHN KERRY, in his official capacity as Secretary of State;
The UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY;
GINA MCCARTHY, in her official capacity as Administrator of the EPA;
For over fifty years, the United States of America has known that carbon dioxide (“CO2”) pollution from burning fossil fuels was causing global warming and dangerous climate change, and that continuing to burn fossil fuels would destabilize the climate system on which present and future generations of our nation depend for their wellbeing and survival. Defendants also knew the harmful impacts of their actions would significantly endanger Plaintiffs, with the damage persisting for millennia. Despite this knowledge, Defendants continued their policies and practices of allowing the exploitation of fossil fuels.
Sources:
http://www.rtcc.org/2015/08/14/8-year-old-takes-us-government-to-court-over-climate-change/
Case 6:15-cv-01517-TC Document 1 Filed 08/12/15
h/t to Dennis Ambler
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Not one of those kids has lived through any global warming at all, which reveals the big problem with being indoctrinated: you’re the last to know.
They may not have observed any global warming, but they just KNOW.
It’s just a, well, feeling.
Yea, it’s “the vibe of the thing”.
What specific harm has been done? How do you sue for harm that “might” occur?
for example: can I sue you because your car might hit mine at some point in the future? Should the courts force you to stop driving as a result?
+10
America has become a nutless wonder. Make America grow some balls again. Vote Trump!
Do not confuse us with, err.. facts!
Well, at least they’re not blowing them up this time. Once you realise they don’t have a moral floor, never mind a parental one, you’ve got your head adjusted when dealing with them.
“That child’s hurt eyes at the end of that clip reminded me inescapably of that toddler trying to stand up straight enough in the middle of some adult dispute they should never have been dragged into. Shame on you Mother, shame on you.”
https://thepointman.wordpress.com/2015/07/10/am-i-standing-up-straight-enough-daddy/
Pointman
Thanks for the link, Pointman. I read the article and watched the video, which led me to more articles and videos, and so on. So much wisdom, so little time…
Ideological child abuse.
That’s not a new thing for every cause .
This beginning to feel like Clockwork Green!
Hansen loves the little children
All the children of the world
Red and yellow black and white
They are precious in his site
Hansen loves the little children of the world
With BBQ sauce.
Legal ecolunacy – from Mann to Hansen, there is a trail which shames the name of science.
They need lawyers to enforce their brand of science.
True. The facts sure don’t.
Just let the Vatican handle the complaints by the children.
Ouch ! 🙂
What next; give them green shirts and teach them to goose-step?
At least Schrödinger had the good grace to use his cat in his work, rather than the children. A bit harsh on the feline itself and cat lovers maybe but at least no children were harmed.
True, but a cat can’t sue. Heh, but neither can children.
As a tax paying ciitzen of the United States, I am disgusted that our government has to waste time and money defending itself from nuisance lawsuits such as this. The Weather Channel (aka the Climate Channel) here in the U.S. gave this story many, many minutes of time last Saturday morning. I was just trying to find out if it would rain that day, and they kept droning on and on about these noble kids. Frustrated, I switched off the TV and looked in the local newspaper for the weather, which was accurate enough. Interesting that Hansen was behind it. Thanks for the info.
What makes you think the government does not want to be found guilty
Perhaps so. But they still have to expend resources to answer the plantiff’s charges. Even if the answer is, “Present!” (old Obama joke).
Hell, I assumed the government was PAYING for these kids to sue it so they can be found ‘guilty’ of not doing what they want to do.
Standard EPA tactics.
Yup. A tried-and-true tactic by EPA, sue-and-settle. And as part of the settlement, you get the government (you and me) to pay for the plaintiff’s lawyers.
TWC couldn’t predict 12:30 at 12 noon, much less anything weather related. You are better off asking a shaman for the weather report. Seriously. There is a reason why very few people cried when DirecTV dropped TWC from their satellite lineup.
What makes you think they are going to defend themselves. The EPA has perfected the tactic of helping eco-activists come up with lawsuits, which the EPA dutifully loses, then they have a court order requiring them to do what they wanted to do all along, but couldn’t get congress to authorize.
“our government has to waste time and money defending itself”
I think you misunderstand. Your government is actually paying Hansen to do this. It will raise a token defence and lose. Then they will claim that every action is to comply with this judgement.
The EPA has been doing that for years.
So when somebody becomes a lawyer, and has law offices with an address in a mini-mall and everything, they still can’t afford their own email address and have to use gmail.
Right.
Can a lawyer use gmail (or any Google cloud, or any cloud service) for client-lawyer correspondence?
Uh… yes? Why wouldn’t they be able to? I’m not even sure what you think “Google cloud” means in this context, but the fact mail servers are run by Google in no way means a lawyer shouldn’t use them for communication with clients. A large enough law firm would certainly prefer to have its own mail servers, but for smaller setups, something like Gmail will likely be more secure than any homebrew.system they’d create.
There’s no reason to expect Gmail to snoop into your e-mails and violate your clients’ privacy. It could happen, of course, but if it did, it’d be such a major thing that it’d affect millions of people. A business that employs maybe half a dozen people generally doesn’t take many precautions against events of that magnitude.
Unless you encrypt what you put on drive or in the cloud, Google and any other ad based service provider will index your data so they can send you targeted ads, moreover; it can always be accessed by subpoena. I know for sure that Google makes it hard for anyone to gain access to personal information (even employees). They also encrypt user data before storing it on their disk drives and all traffic between data centers is now encrypted, but of course, they have the keys.
Brandon where were you last year?? No reason to expect Gmail to snoop into your Data?
Since leaked documents revealed that Internet companies like Apple, Facebook and Google were giving the National Security Agency vast access to people’s online information under a scheme codenamed PRISM, those Silicon Valley titans have taken pains to deny participation in such a program.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/20/nsa-prism-tech-companies_n_4999378.html
Your friendly neighborhood NSA backdoor pipeline at work.
So Hansen is helping minors to give the president an excuse that he was forced by authority to scuttle the economy by enacting chokehold restrictions of industrial and agricultural activities on his way out of office.
Sounds like an inside job which exploits the minors.
If the children truly desire this action, then they can wait until they are of age to vote and participate in governmental affairs to effect changes which they have well explored the consequences of. We have a lower age limit on government offices for a reason.
They have done this before. Activists went to every state and used either a legislative or petition process supposedly initiated by children to make the same argument, happened about 5-6 years ago. All were turned back. What a waste of time.
Hey, in US law, Burden of Proof lies with the Plaintiff. Call their bluff, let them have their day in court. It’s a lose lose with the Gubmnet. Unless……this is a very clever ruse by said Gubment to enact law via legal proxy. The EPA have form in this area.
Exactly right. EPA will feign to defend itself, then settle, having established a precedent as well as funding Hansen et al with more taxpayer funds to further the grab. It’s a watermelon’s win-win
Any court settlement should go to the children in trust until some significant warming does actually occur.
They will just point to all the lies from the last few decades about how storms are bigger, etc, won’t matter that there is no evidence to support the claim. The EPA is recognized as the expert in this matter and others won’t be given grounds to put forth alternate information.
My mind boggles!
Much of their climate “science” having been exposed as junk, they now resort to using their own children as pawns in a pointless exercise to get attention for their cause. Do they presume no one else cares about children? Very disturbing. Lesson learned; If you cannot win with the facts among your peers then move to the courts were you need not convince other scientists.
@Sunny Lawn
You say “If you cannot win with the facts among your peers…”
Actually, you can’t: http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
Ah yes, Government. Always my first source for top rate propaganda, err, science. No vested interests there!
Let’s see what dynamite science we have here… “Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities.”
Voting on adverbials of probability, rock solid stuff! Now that’s science, kids.
No, its actually from multiple peer-reviewed studies of polling results.
If you call subjective interpretation, often in disagreement with the actual authors, a poll. Then, sure. Do you even read these studies? How about their filtration methodologies? I sight to behold! I’m referring, of course, to Cook, et al. Or, perhaps you were referring to Doran? More like a voluntary response, shot gunned mailing questionnaire, but I’ll accept ‘poll’, sure. But, according to that ‘poll’, I’m a true believer as well! Whoda thunk it?!
Hi there Warren,
You never did supply a citation for the quotes you gave in an earlier post.
Have you found it yet please?
Andy
A consensus of 43%, somewhat underwhelming, no?
http://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/cms/publicaties/pbl-2015-climate-science-survey-questions-and-responses_01731.pdf
http://fabiusmaximus.com/2015/07/29/new-study-undercuts-ipcc-keynote-finding-87796/
@Joseph Murphy
Lets see. On the one hand we have Joseph Murphy and other random amateurs posting on WUWT. On the other hand we have NASA Scientists quoting peer-reviewed results. Which should one believe? Its soooooo hard. Not.
These “peer reviewed” findings Popeye? http://www.springer.com/gb/about-springer/media/statements/retraction-of-articles-from-springer-journals/735218
I trust a poster on WUWT more.
@Jones
Hi there Jones. What citation are you seeking?
warren,
learn what is meant by peer review.
Joseph Murphy,
Pay no atention to warrenlb, he’s just proselytizing his debunked eco-religion. He says: Which should one believe? <– Perfect comment from a religious fanatic who can only use the Appeal to (corrupted) Authorities for his arguments. Actual facts get in his way.
I do not believe NASA or anyone else completely. But I trust much more in satellite measurements, which show no warming for many years — thus debunking wlb's belief system. Satellite measurements show no warming for almost twenty years.
As for the 'consensus' that the planet has been warming, well, sure it has — naturally, since the Little Ice Age. But current CO2 emissions have nothing measurable to do with it. As pointed out, global warming has stopped, while CO2 continues to rise. So much for the 'dangerous MMGW' conjecture. It was wrong.
All the correct predictions in the world cannot 'prove' a hypothesis or a conjecture. But all it takes is one wrong prediction to falsify a conjecture or hypothesis.
The climate alarmist crowd has never made an alarming prediction that was correct. They have all been flat wrong. Thus, the ‘dangerous man-made global warming’ scare that warrenlb is constantly trying to prop up has been repeatedly falsified. That conjecture is a dead duck.
But ‘dangerous MMGW’ is warrenlb’s religion, so no rational argument or data can ever convince him that he’s wrong. He is just an amusing old man, a self-admitted has-been (I usta be a v.p.!) who tries to sell his alarmist nonsense to folks who know better than he does what’s real, and what isn’t.
It doesn’t matter how many junk surveys you add, the results are still junk.
“warrenlb
August 19, 2015 at 3:18 pm
@Jones
Hi there Jones. What citation are you seeking?”
Thank you for replying. For this post (below) you made the other day. Where did you get it from?
…………………………………….
warrenlb
August 11, 2015 at 1:59 pm
Steyn chose three quotes as promo material to represent the book’s contents. One of the scientists has recently co-authored a paper confirming Mann’s hockey stick graph, and notes that his quote only appears damning because it lacks all context. A second has worked on a major paper that also confirmed Mann’s hockey stick graph, and has stated that the attacks on Mann “have no justification.” The third quote is from a physicist who doesn’t work on climate change, so he can’t accurately be described as one of Mann’s scientific peers.
For all his quote mining, it seems like the best Steyn could do when it came to finding criticisms from Mann’s peers is write up two quotes from scientists who agree with Mann’s findings and one from someone who’s not a climate scientist at all. Looks like Steyn’s efforts here fall as flat as the handle on Mann’s hockey stick.
Can I please have citations? Did you write this yourself or did you copy the above from somewhere else?
Warren?
The crux of the matter is that now they have to prove it in order to be successful in their suit. And I’m not sure they can, in fact I’d bet against them being able to.
an order from the District Court of Oregon, requiring Obama to implement a national plan for the reduction of atmospheric concentrations of CO2 to 350 ppm by the year 2100.
So they think that a district court in Oregon can compel the United States (through its president) to compel the world to reduce CO2 levels? How is this to be accomplished? By the bombing the rest of the world back to the stone age?
I’m not sure if it is the stupidity or the arrogance that burns, but burn it does.
DMH: I think they’re talking about a NATIONAL plan here, not a global one. That implies to me anyway that these young people are naive, gullible and brainwashed enough to believe that the U.S. can bring down CO2 levels to 350 ppm all by its lonesome. It is (or should be) common knowledge that Obama is not going to necessarily get the co-operation of other major CO2 emitters like China to help him bring levels down to 350. We’ve been seeing that a pow-wows like the one at Copenhagen — and likely will again in Paris later this year.
The incredible arrogance of people like Hansen preclude them from being open-minded enough to realize there might be problems with the CO2-induced CAGW theory, and that brings out the stupidity of Hansen for all the world to see. And yes, it does burn.
Furthermore, bringing atmospheric CO2 levels back down below 350ppm would significantly reduce the food’s food supply. Do the brain-wash little children realise that?
@dmh
Not so hard: http://citizensclimatelobby.org/carbon-fee-and-dividend/
Should have been addressed to CD in Wisconsin
1895 is not the stone age. We were doing okay then.
Yea, I hear Polio and Small Pox were a riot!
They should have included the military in their list of plaintiffs because the only power the listed parties have is national. To control global CO2 levels we need to declare war as well as cool the oceans.
Counsel for the Plaintiff: “Your Honor, for over fifty years, the United States of America has known that carbon dioxide (“CO2”) pollution from burning fossil fuels was causing global warming and dangerous climate change”
Judge: “And you have evidence of this – you can prove this?”
CftP: “Errrr….”
Counsel for the Plaintiff: “Your Honor, for over fifty years, the United States of America has known that carbon dioxide (“CO2”) pollution from burning fossil fuels was causing global warming and dangerous climate change”
Judge: “Fifty years? You mean since 1965 when we had global cooling? ?”
CftP: “Yes, your honor, Global warming causes global cooling….”
Hansen on the stand: “Yes, your Honor. The Globe has been warming for 50 years. I adjusted up the numbers myself.”
Council for the defense (Obama Administration): “we concur with plaintiffs complaint your honor, we have no defense.”
There are no rational litigants in this case!
Oregon. Figures. Boy, that place sure went down the toilet.
And how. I grew up in western Oregon and got the hell out at 18. Moved to the beautiful State of Eastern Washington, but have been exiled to Seattle for three years thanks to work relocation.
Seattle and Portland are poison and alone have ruined this once vibrant, wild, and free corner of the U.S.
“beautiful State of Eastern Washington”
Shhhhhhhhhh! Speaking of mosquitoes, we had one come in on approach at Felts Field the other day but he saw a delivery truck that needed a ring job thought it was DDT and only did a touch and go.
It is the Progressives, that moved up from California. They wrecked their state and couldn’t stand to live there anymore, so they moved and brought their ideology with them, because they are just plain stupid. Although, I went to school with a very intelligent guy, until he went to Reed college in Portland and started smoking dope. He dropped out and started selling used cars, I think, and teaching daycare in Eugene. Maybe some of his former students are plaintiffs in this matter. Maybe, it is never too young for parents to get their children started on drugs, at least in Eugene??? Such a pity. Gone are the days of Tom McCall: come and visit, then leave.
I grew up in Portland, then the locusts came up from California, yep. It’s really la-la land out there now. Moved away at 18 also, would never, ever go back to live. May never go back at all. So sad. Such a beautiful place.
Politically yes. With fault on both the left and right.
However Oregon is still one of the greatest places to live. I’ve lived or worked in 32 states. Enjoyed just about every one. But none can top Oregon.
Pretty much every time I visit Oregon or travel through it I hop out of the car to gas up only then to have an attendant come rushing out saying it is against the law in Oregon to pump your own gasoline.
http://www.bergencounty.com/trivia-and-fun/why-you-can-t-pump-your-own-gas-in-bergen-county-nj-1.1010289
“And yes, there is an obvious disadvantage to the full-service law: When New Jersey residents travel out of state, they are sometimes befuddled when they pull into a self-service-only gas station and realize they have to get out of the car and pump their own fuel.”
the flip side – further adventures with propaganda, no child left behind, and the every child gets an award generation
The Coddling of the American Mind
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/
Hi Bubba,
Amazing, isn’t it?
shocking anyway
hi
Thanks Bubba. Great read. Summed up the distorted mental processes of global warming fanatics too.
On the surface this smells of fraud and child abuse, I honestly did not think my opinion of Hansen could get any lower, but he never ceases to amaze.
It doesn’t just smell, it stinks. In fact, it reeks. These people could care diddly squat about their children’s needs (although, they fatuously profess to do so). What they really care about is having the children satisfy their own adult needs. That is profoundly self centered and immature.
Cases like this have been dismissed in the past as being not justiciable as political questions that are to be resolved by the Congress. That should be the result here.But one never knows how a given federal judge may act.
I wonder if they can convict Hansen of violation of Child labor laws. The only thing he is doing is making Soros Rich for free. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/08/19/billionaire-george-soros-warms-up-to-coal-as-stock-prices-hit-bottom
I demand that King Cnut tax me into the Stone Age to stop the tide from coming in!
Perhaps the children can sue Obama for their inheritance of close to twenty trillion dollars in debt.
They don’t have that rammed down their throats in school.
It’s a pity people don’t read things and make all sorts of claims based on preconceived ideas.
King Canute was actually making a point to his sycophantic courtiers that he COULD NOT control nature.
Oh, most of us know that, Alex. But it still makes a good metaphor.
Especially since king ‘this is when the sea stops rising’ Obama stepped into the Whitehouse. >¿<
I’ve no doubt that the framers of the Constitution never envisioned the judiciary as a player in creating policy. As an instrument to keep the legislative and administrative branches from usurping more authority than granted, as a brake, yes but not as a driver in setting policy that should be left to the legislative branch of government! This is what comes of too many lawyers in public office!
Just too many lawyers, period.
To be be fair, there are lawyers whose goal it is to uphold the law. The problem is there are too many whose goal is to exploit the law.
(And to many of those are the ones who write and rule on the law.)
The primary purpose of the legal system is to employ and enrich lawyers.