Miracle “Not a Treaty” Paris Climate Deal Apparently to be Subject of Law Enforcement Pursuits
It was one thing when, academics being academics, some immediately invoked President Obama’s purported unilateral ratification of the Paris climate agreement as reason to compel imposition — indeed, judicial commandeering — of the “climate”/energy suppression agenda through federal policy. (This was because “The Paris Agreement reflects the broader global recognition that climate change poses significant threats to fundamental human rights and all governments have obligations to address these threats under established principles of international law.”).
That was in the Climate Kidz case, Juliana v. United States (dismissed by the 9th Cir. on other grounds). Depending on how things proceed in coming weeks, it won’t be the last time we see a court presented with that issue.
It is another thing entirely to see that Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey has promised Michael Bloomberg’s group that, if it provided her Office with privately hired lawyers she would name as “Special Assistant Attorneys General”, they would “be focused on ensuring that Massachusetts and neighboring states meet the long-term commitments set forth…in the Paris Agreement.”
Wait huh? You may be wondering, um, what long-term commitments are states bound to meet under the Paris climate treaty? A good question. And given Healey’s activist use of her office and the courts to impose this agenda, the absence of a good answer doesn’t mean the threat is not a serious one.
Indeed, the eagle-eyed reader no doubt spotted another “innovative” vow there, to pursue consumer fraud claims against disfavored targets, which Healey did. At the request of tort lawyers and activists. Pretty ugly stuff.
And pretty relevant, in another one of those coincidences the climate litigation industry is quite full of. As Energy Policy Advocates informed a court this very day, in a filing against Healey’s Office for its refusal to let the public know more about these promises made to an activist, deep-pocketed donor:
The Bloomberg Center/SEEIC placed two SAAGs to pursue this agenda out of OAG, one of whom is named Megan Herzog. Ms. Herzog is a former staff attorney with The Conservation Law Foundation, which is the group that – records released in this matter demonstrate – coordinated with Matt Pawa on “the Exxon issue” and [“climate nuisance” lawyer Matt] Pawa’s briefing of [Healey’s Office]. [FN: “I have been in discussions with Brad Campbell of CLF about the Exxon issue and we are coordinating on this.” January 4, 2016 email from Pawa to OAG’s Christophe Courchesne and Melissa Hoffer, Subject: global warming, released by OAG on September 11, 2019 after Plaintiff filed this suit.]
The second SAAG, Nora J. Chorover, also has professional ties to CLF. [FN: See, e.g., https://casetext.com/case/conservation-law-found-inc-v-roland-teiner-co].
Small world. And — barring President Trump at long last transmitting the Paris climate treaty to the Senate — a world in which we should soon expect to see what we have all been assured would never happen: law enforcement suing to compel compliance with a purely voluntary pact that most definitely is not binding and, you can be assured, “not a treaty”.