Guest essay by Eric Worrall
The Supreme Court has just overturned a government attempt to have the children’s climate court case dismissed.
Young Activists Can Sue Government Over Climate Change, Supreme Court Says
November 3, 20182:12 PM ET
JACOB PINTERA group of young people can sue the federal government over its climate change policies, the Supreme Court said Friday. Since it was first filed in 2015, the government has requested several times that Juliana v. United States be dismissed.
“I want to trust that we are truly on track for trial without having further delays,” Kelsey Juliana, a 22-year-old plaintiff, said in a statement, “but these defendants are treating this case, our democracy, and the security of mine and future generations like it’s a game. I’m tired of playing this game.”
The Department of Justice did not respond to NPR’s request for comment.
BREAKING: United States Supreme Court Denies Trump Administration’s Request for Stay – Juliana v. United States Moves Forward, Again. Read full press release: https://t.co/KJ8WKF4N3l #youthvgov #TrialoftheCentury #LetTheYouthBeHeard pic.twitter.com/EyEg7QMuWj
— Our Children's Trust (@youthvgov) November 3, 2018
…
The trial had previously been scheduled to start Oct. 29. The group Our Children’s Trust, which has provided support for the plaintiffs, said it had requested a status conference to set a new trial date.
It now could start as early as mid-November, Draheim said.
…
The Supreme Court judgement does not mark the end of the problems faced by the plaintiffs – reading the Supreme Court judgement, there may now be a substantially increased possibility the Ninth Circuit will dismiss the case.
… Although the Ninth Circuit has twice denied the Government’s request for mandamus relief, it did so without prejudice. And the court’s basis for denying relief rested, in large part, on the early stage of the litigation, the likelihood that plaintiffs’ claims would narrow as the case progressed, and the possibility of attaining relief through ordinary dispositive motions. Those reasons are, to a large extent, no longer pertinent. The 50-day trial was scheduled to begin on October 29, 2018, and is being held in abeyance only because of the current administrative stay. …
Read more: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/110218zr2_8ok0.pdf
It seems a shame that this farce will be allowed to continue for now, but I think I understand the Supreme Court’s reasoning.
Lets hope the Ninth Circuit brings this matter to a speedy conclusion.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Unicorn-meister. Mark Jacobson, says he will be giving expert testimony. If so, I hope he can be cross examined with some pointed questions.
https://twitter.com/mzjacobson/status/1058763757596270592
The discovery process will be a very entertaining journey !
If the suit was to result in an award of $$$, why would it not be split between every US citizen?
What right would the court have to only award damages to specific people when supposedly all are harmed.
And if everyone gets paid in the end no one gets paid. It is simply a form of tax.
I have yet to have anyone explain to me how and why minors were given standing in this case. When they lose, and are expected to pay court costs and damages, the minors will not have any assets that can be attached. That is, they have nothing to lose by making outrageous claims. Justice is not being served by allowing minors to sue. I hope that their parents will be held financially responsible.
This plaintiff Kelsey Juliana better know that in a court case she will need to bring viable evidence to back her case which will be based on the global warming affects of CO2. Models just won’t cut it.
An Unholy Alliance: the UN, Soros, and the Francis Papacy – Elizabeth Yore
This information should be seen and heard by as many people as possible and it has nothing to do with religion.
“If You Control Carbon You Control Life”
How far is Big Pharma in this court case?
[snip- wildly off-topic – STOP IT -mod]
@mods More anti-vxxer thread hijacking/spam from simple-t
John, you really have a problem with people expressing provably correct and important ideas that you admit you can’t contradict.
You should get it checked.
[And you should take a hike, anti-vaccination has NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS THREAD- Anthony]
LOL simple-t, your nonsense is not “provably correct”, indeed it’s just the opposite. But the “problem” is every thread you go into you hijack into a platform to spout your anti-vaxxer BS. This forum isn’t about vaccines, the topic of this post isn’t about vaccines, the specific post you were replying to wasn’t about vaccines and yet here you are hijacking it to spam yet more OT BS about vaccines yet again. The mods don’t let the chemtrails idiots get away with that, they shouldn’t let you either, IMHO. There are anti-vaxxer forums where your anti-vaxxer BS would be on topic, I suggest you go to one of them instead of spamming this place with your OT nonsense.
There is no such thing as “anti vaxxer”; this is a BS term typically used by NPC.
There are non believers in the vaccine cult. Pseudo science pushed by huge corporations and a well organized fascistic “medical” corporation with the help of “experts” in laws and other buffoons is 100% on topic here.
Yes there is, look in the mirror you are an anti-vaxxer. Take your anti-scientific anti-vaxxer conspiracy nonsense to the appropriate forum. This is not that forum, so please stop hijacking and spamming threads here.
Also, I see you reference the meme NPC, but you clearly don’t understand it. It’s one more thing you merely need to look in the nearest mirror to see an example of. You see, NPCs are marked by their limited programming. Whether that be “Orangeman bad” or in your case “Vaccines bad”. NPCs, regardless of the actual topic of conversation, reply based on their limited programming. Every thread, no matter the actual topic, you reply with you limited program of anti-vaxxer nonsense.
This just goes to show that the effects that bad science can have on society can be far-reaching. In this case, the plaintiffs in the case are assuming that all the scientific propaganda they’ve been fed about CO2 being a greenhouse gas is valid. That’s just not so, and taxpayer money is going to have to be spent on trying this spurious case and others like it.