McClaughry: Co-chairs of the legislative Climate Caucus bemoan West Virginia v. EPA

By John McClaughry

The climate warriors are loudly bemoaning the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency. The case involved a sweeping bureaucratic edict from the EPA to force electric power plants to cut way back on carbon dioxide emissions.

state of Vermont

State Sen. Chris Pearson

Let’s leave aside whether that action would have any effect on Earth’s climate. The problem was that Congress never authorized the EPA to impose such draconian regulations — and in fact, a Democratic controlled Congress refused to do so on at least two occasions in recent years.

So the Biden EPA just said “you have to do what we say.” The Supreme Court said, “Congress could surely have authorized the EPA to impose such a rule, but Congress didn’t, and EPA has no authority to just announce whatever it thinks is a good idea.”

You’d think the friends of democracy would have cheered — but no. The co-chairs of the legislative Climate Caucus, Democratic Rep. Sarah Copeland Hanzas and Progressive Sen. Chris Pearson, let fly with “last week the Supreme Court sided with big polluters, limiting the EPA from setting the kind of highly effective emissions standards we need.”

This was so cynically dishonest that I never want to hear from either of those two again. It’s the business of Congress to make the laws, not the business of politically driven bureaucrats in some government agency. The Supreme Court has stood up for the Constitution and the rule of law.

John McClaughry is vice president of the Ethan Allen Institute. Reprinted with permission from the Ethan Allen Institute Blog.

Image courtesy of state of Vermont

8 thoughts on “McClaughry: Co-chairs of the legislative Climate Caucus bemoan West Virginia v. EPA

  1. Are these the same yayhoos who were for shutting down our clean cheap Nuke plant without building a new bigger cleaner thorium plant? What will the poor and middle class who can’t afford golf cart
    cars do for transportation when they kill off gas fueled autos? How’s our minuscule foot print going
    to change anything if China is increasing their out put @ 180% a year? What’s the cost for the
    taxpayer/fossil fuel user for this minuscule drop their trying achieve? All I see is parrots of the NWO
    demanding what will not save squat and will end up hurting more for nothing but liberal feelz…

  2. Ah, the co-chairs of the bogus climate caucus are bemoaning a Supreme Court decision that they didn’t like.
    Sucks to be them, doesn’t it?…

  3. These progressives are either incredibly stupid or habitual liars. I think it’s both. On one hand they always claim democracy as our form of government instead of the republic of which it is. They prefer mob rule. On the other hand, the radical progressives left is funded by environmental groups and the green industry giants who profit from the lies being told. The liberal media supports them as well as the Tech giants. The pockets are deep, and the politicians are owned and rewarded handsomely for destroying America by claiming that the planet that will die in 10 years. This all works for the useless idiots and indoctrinated college students used by VPIRG. Progressives have no conscience; they have an agenda of power and control. They view the US Constitution as an impediment to their cause. The ends justify the means. Lying is just one of the means. Being stupid comes from being indoctrinated into the progressive cult. The sky is falling, the sky is falling, and the big bad court said maybe it is, but the constitution grants congress the power of making laws not king Obama or Resident Biden!

  4. Good grief.. I’m old enough to remember when every factory around was dumping whatever toxins they had right into the nearest rivers.
    Can we please give it a break about how we are destroying the planet?
    I remember when we really were and we are far from that now.

    Everyone wants to do the best they can to not cause damage to the earth.
    But these people are extremists that refuse to understand their own ‘Co-Exist’ bumper stickers.
    Man has to Co-Exist with what man needs to survive too..
    No we cannot live in tents and eat worms in the year 2022.
    No we cannot all live in tiny houses and eat stuff we found in the woods.
    No, we are not doing this so get over it.
    We need balance…

  5. The sky is falling, the sky is falling ” again” watch all the liberal tears start falling when
    someone, like the SCOTUS steps on their toes and reigns in these clowns.

    Wake up people, vote these inept fools out, they only care about one thing and that’s there
    agenda, just listen to the hype……….. how pathetic !!

  6. Bravo! SCOTUS never said they are FOR or AGAINST any of the EPA enviro mandates. All SCOTUS stated was that such “far reaching” EPA mandates, that affect nationwide, have to come from the Legislative body (congress) and not from the EXECUTIVE BRANCH! It was Biden and Obama who ursurped the law by granting the EPA unfathomable power via their EXECUTIVE BRANCH orders that gave the EPA “Carte Blanche” ti rule nationwide. All SCOTUS did was to say STOP IT…and go to Congress to pass any such climate legislation you desire. This is exactly what SCOTUS also did on abortion issue. It is not a SCOTUS decison to make, it is a LEGISLATIVE issue…and needs to be addressed by the States.

    It shows you just how ignorant and stupid almost every Liberal is… the mantra that SCOTUS banned abortion. Idiots. If that WAS true, then WHY did SCOTUS uphold the abortion laws of Mississippi? Abortion is LEGAL in that right wing southern state, up to 15 weeks. SO WHERE DID SCOTUS BAN IT?

  7. These two are mad men. there is zero proof that man-made CO2 affects anything. All the scientists in the world have failed for the last 50 years to demonstrate in a repeatable, peer reviewed experiment how man made CO2 affects warming.

    Vote these nut cases out of office.

Comments are closed.