“U.S. helps sink world’s first global carbon tax,” read the headline. And every American who values common sense should celebrate.
President Trump’s administration stood firm against the United Nations’ attempt to impose a worldwide carbon tax through the International Maritime Organization’s laughable “net zero framework.” The message couldn’t be clearer: America’s energy policy is made in Washington—not dictated by unelected global bureaucrats.
But while the global carbon tax was stopped abroad, the same idea is being smuggled in here at home—through the courts. Environmental activists and their trial lawyer allies are attempting to do in the U.S. what the U.N. could not: force a carbon tax on working families.
Recently, one of the attorneys associated with a climate lawsuit got caught telling the truth behind their strategy. Here’s the full quote in his own words:
“Tort liability is an indirect carbon tax. You sue an oil company, an oil company is liable. The oil company then passes that liability on to the people who are buying its products. In some sense, it is the most efficient way. The people who buy those products are now going to be paying for the cost imposed by those products. … [This is] somewhat of a convoluted way to achieve the goals of a carbon tax.”
That’s not spin—that’s a confession.
“The oil company then passes that liability on to the people who are buying its products… The people who buy those products are now going to be paying for the cost imposed by those products.”
Translation: We know working families are going to pay the price.
“Tort liability is an indirect carbon tax…… [This is] somewhat of a convoluted way to achieve the goals of a carbon tax.”
Translation: We know we can’t pass this through Congress, so we’re going through the backdoor.
Americans already know a carbon tax means higher prices—and they’ve rejected it every time. According to one poll, more than half 55% say they are unwilling to pay even $1 more per month on their energy bills for climate action. That disapproval skyrockets to 75% when the proposed cost reaches $75 or more per month. The bottom line is working families won’t support higher energy costs for symbolic climate virtue-signaling.
The Trump Administration understands that carbon taxes—whether global or domestic—hurt working Americans. Now the Supreme Court must decide whether to allow these climate lawsuits to proceed. Over 100 Members of Congress, led by House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, have urged the Court to reject them, warning that activists are trying to use the judiciary to achieve what Congress has repeatedly refused to do.
If carbon tax proponents truly believe in their cause, they should make their case before Congress. But they won’t. Even the most left-wing members know that voting for a new carbon tax would be political suicide. So instead, they’re counting on sympathetic courts to do their dirty work. And they’re counting on the public not to notice before it’s too late.
When the lawyers for the environmental movement tell you what they’re trying to do, believe them. They’ve admitted quiet part out loud: their lawsuits are a carbon tax by another name. The Supreme Court must see through this scheme and shut it down before Americans are forced to pay the price.
Larry Behrens is an energy expert and the Communications Director for Power The Future. He has appeared on Fox News, ZeroHedge, and NewsMax speaking in defense of American energy workers. You can follow him on X/Twitter @larrybehrens
This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Washington State has its “Climate Commitment Act”. The fees are like indulgences, paid to the State. The word “tax” is not an approved word in the State. The concept is “Cap-and -Invest”. “It touches every part of Washington State“, so say the proponents. They mean the projects supported with the fees. But, of course, it also impacts the costs of everything to everybody – – “women, children, and the poor”, or something like that.
It is a regressive carbon tax imposed
in contempt of the Commerce Clause,
which gives the regulation of interstate commerce exclusively to the national
Congress.
A major issue with Constitutional Law
is bypassing normal rules by the pretense it is “civil” law.
Lawfare has become the new politics.
Supported by judges with huge far-left biases and ideologies.
Yes. While the Republicans were sleeping the Left packed the district federal judge positions. Those are “for life” positions that can only be removed by death, step down, or impeachment and have outsized power for their positions.
CO2 can’t cause catastrophic anthropogenic global warming there is no need to eliminate or reduce our use of fossil fuel. These are just power hungry control freaks trying to limit our choices and increase our cost of living. The lowest of the bottom feeders.
The legal profession were looking for their permanent money tree and they bumped into it the moment the law was asked to make judgement on energy production.
Once the law industry hooked onto the untapped area of endless opportunity they never looked back and we are now all held to ransom by the environmental industry engaging the law as its front line troops.
The front line troops or legal divisions love the privilege of going into battle certain they will never be negatively impacted never shot never made to pay the price for their activities.
Maybe we need to reconsider the rules around lawyers and their ‘personal’ risk free activities in courts up and down the land.
If lawyers are engaged in promoting vexatious and fraudulently presented cases, they should be made to suffer the consequences of their part in aiding and abetting a preconceived false action.
Lawyers have no morals. They just do what brings in a hefty income. They more often than not favour criminals and harm the innocent.
More crime means more work for lawyers.