Molly Gray slams ‘foolish’ SCOTUS decision to rein in EPA federal climate bureaucracy

By Guy Page

If she’s elected to Congress in November, don’t expect Lt. Gov. Molly Gray to fight against an aggressive federal bureaucracy, at least regarding climate change. In a recent campaign statement she called the SCOTUS decision rebuking the climate change policy-making role of the Environmental Protection Agency as a “foolish” action by a “radical court.”

state of Vermont

Vermont Lt. Gov. Molly Gray

In West Virginia vs. EPA, SCOTUS ruled that the federal government shall not create environmental policy — specifically the Obama-era Clean Power Plan intended to close coal-burning power plants and transition to renewable power generation, notably wind and solar. On June 30 Gray said:

“This reckless Supreme Court has issued another disastrous ruling – this time, handing a victory to fossil fuel companies. This foolish decision represents the latest step in a decades-long conservative effort to dismantle regulatory powers in favor of corporate special interests. The Americans most greatly harmed by this ruling will be the ones who can least afford it.

“Congress must overcome its climate dysfunction and act now to clarify the EPA’s role in regulating carbon emissions. This issue cannot be left up to judicial interpretation. As this brazen court has demonstrated repeatedly, the basic rights and interests of Americans – especially the most vulnerable – are under attack.

“In my own lifetime, I’ve seen profound changes to Vermont’s climate. Our ski seasons are shorter, and family farms, like the one I grew up on, must navigate increasingly unpredictable growing seasons.

“I’ll be a forceful, next-generation climate advocate for Vermont in Washington. I earned my law degree from Vermont Law School where I served as an editor on the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law and led the Journal’s Symposium on Climate Change and National Security. I’ve also served as a federal law clerk and Assistant Attorney General; I understand the role of our courts and Congress in setting federal climate and energy standards. I’m ready to put my legal training to work to counteract this radical court.”

Guy Page is publisher of the Vermont Daily Chronicle. Reprinted with permission.

Images courtesy of Molly Gray and state of Vermont

31 thoughts on “Molly Gray slams ‘foolish’ SCOTUS decision to rein in EPA federal climate bureaucracy

  1. “In a recent campaign statement she called the SCOTUS decision rebuking the climate change policy-making role of the Environmental Protection Agency as a “foolish” action by a “radical court.”
    Look whose calling the kettle black!
    And this woman is running for the U.S. Senate?
    To disrespect another branch of the United States government because you don’t like/agree with their decision is childish and unprofessional. It’s also interesting that she’s running for senate already, a post for which she is unqualified. Good golly Miss Molly!

  2. When given the chose between two dumbasses, vote for neither. Do a write in vote if you have to.

  3. If you go back and look at all of the 75 years of a liberal SCOTUS we have endured tells it all. The left loved the decisions that matched their ideology. As conservatives, we swallowed hard on many of the crazy decisions coming out of the court.
    It took 50 years to get a reliable conservative majority. So liberals who were so used to the left wing decisions they are now in a tail spin. They do not read or analyze the latest decisions and have no plan to do so. It easier to protest and demonstrate than try to rationalize the decisions.
    Turn about is fair play. Molly, Becca, et al, you are not qualified and do not represent real Vermonters. take a hike!

  4. We can word-smith and argue about Molly Gray, her thoughts, her delusions, and her agenda all day long.
    In the end, she’s just a disconnected, ignorant, progressive dimwit.

  5. Either a liar or dumb….read Molly Gray’s own words:

    ” I understand the role of our courts and Congress in setting federal climate and energy standards. I’m ready to put my legal training to work to counteract this radical court.”

    See that? She says the COURTS SET CLIMATE CHANGE LAW?. Wrong….she is only tiny right…Congress makes the laws. Not the courts. Courts enforce the laws – enacted by Congress! Can anyone clue this lady in? What did they “teach” her at VT Law School…..Oh, don’t answer that, we can guess what VT Law School teaches, agenda wise 🙂

    And get this B.S. from her:

    “I’m ready to put my legal training to work to counteract this radical court.”

    WHAT RADICAL COURT? SCOTUS ruled that Bidens/Obama’s EXECUTIVE ORDERS for far reaching EPA national emission controls, are wrong. The Court is NOT RADICAL! All they did was state that climate emission is a “far reaching” nationwide issue and the laws of such need to be decided by CONGRESS…..not by EXECUTIVE orders by Obama or Biden.. or by the JUDICIARY. (scotus or otherwise) There nothing in her supposed “legal training” …. to “take on” this “radicalized court”.. CONGRESS makes the laws, not the Court. SCOTUS only is there to enforce what laws Congress makes… and what the constitution already put in place.

    OMG, what a fool. Ignorant VT voters buy it all hook,. line and sinker 🙂

    • Jeffrey,

      Based on the statements of Molly Grey, it appears she had minimal exposure to law courses on US Constitutional Law, which is not surprising in very-low-rated, woke-style, law schools, such as the Vermont Law School.

      How come some of its law professors are not weighing in?

      SCOTUS, on very rare occasions, corrects the judicial errors of a prior SCOTUS.

      That was the case regarding Roe vs Wade, where SCOTUS had established, by judicial fiat, woman had a US Constitutional RIGHT to abortions, whereas no such right was mentioned in the US Constitution.

      All rights stated in the US Constitution were officially considered as “held-in-common”, as agreed to by all the LEGISLATURES OF THE SOVEREIGN states.

      All other rights were retained by the state legislatures, which are elected by the people, to represent the people.

      The people in each state decide how these other rights, including abortion, etc., are protected.

  6. Willem Post:
    To respond to you:
    Wisconsin has just made ballot drop off boxes ILLEGAL.

    Getting this done in Vermont too (if such a thing is possible) would begin helping to break down your one party state..
    Perhaps the idea should be for you all: “Don’t make it so easy To BE A One Party State” (?)

    Also, TNR:
    This comment system you use is no good now that you’ve grown so much.
    People want to have back and forth conversations here, share information, update information here as it breaks.. you’ve grown now to the degree where doing this needs to happen.
    For all its warts, Disqus is still the best platform for people that want to Discuss things and not just leave Comments.
    If you truly believe in Free Speech, then give people the floor and let them talk.
    If ever there was a place where conversations among like-minded people needed to happen- it would be Vermont.
    The need for you all to be able to find eachother to organize is urgent.. you could help with this TNR.
    Please consider this.

    I’ll add, I recall the days when Digger used Disqus and that place was hopping busy (with what is now the TNR readers!!). The desire and the audience is there.. take it, it’s yours if you get yourself set up to handle the crowds of yakkers.
    Thank you for the site, by the way.. I’m trying to help, not be a pain in the neck.
    (NH would not be doing nearly so well if we all didn’t have Granitegrok to organize ourselves with guess what: Disqus!)

    • That site makes you sign up and has the ability to block/cancel you. Please let these people do things as they see fit. I for one will stop reading as well as commenting if discus! is put into place.

  7. Molly Gray has a tissue thin resume filled with busy work activities and painfully short on substance…….She is in no position to label anything the SCOTUS or anyone or any other entity does as foolish or anything else………Ms. Gray does not possess the experience, wisdom or gravitas to ask the voters of Vermont elect her to the US Congress……..It’s as simple as that…….She’s not prepared for the job.

    On the other hand neither is Rebecca Balint a suitable choice……..Just consider the bank and back breaking climate change mandates she pushed on Vermonters as head of the Senate with the Global Warming Solutions Act and the Clean Heat Standard……..Ms. Balint has no idea of what is important to everyday Vermonters.

    • Ms Balint apparently has some hefty finacial backing, showing up as incessant Ads on virtully every YouTube video I view.

      She will not get my vote.

      Side Note:
      A very relevant book, “Going Up The Country” available on Amazon is a mujst ead. John Klar mentions it in a video he published today on YouTube.

      It’s on my Get First list.

  8. With little respect, Molly Gray is either dumb & purely agenda driven, or she is a liar. Neither are good. In SCOTUS of Roe decision, the Court did NOT ban abortion. They merely said that SCOTUS rules on constitutional issues, and abortion is not mentioned in the constitution . Abortion needs to be decided by the LEGISLATIVE branch not Judicial activism, be it right or left wing judges. SCOTUS did NOT BAN abortion, because they upheld the right-wing-state Mississippi law ALLOWING abortions up to 15 weeks. It is not banned. So she is a liar about SCOTUS “banning” abortion. SCOTUS UPHELD IT, via state and legislative branches.

    Next? Molly Gray lies that SCOTUS removed the EPA from climate change regulations. What SCOTUS said in the EPA case was that such “far reaching law” (nationwide emission control) should NOT BE DECICDED by Executive Branch “orders”, and also NOT by the Judiciary..but once again, by the LEGISLATIVE branch (who MAKE ALL LAWS)…in this case CONGRESS , NOT THE COURTS. There is nothing in the Constitution about emissions & SCOTUS regulating emissions control. So SCOTUS threw it out, halted Executive EPA orders and SCOTUS told the LEGISLATIVE branch, i.e. CONGRESS, to make and pass any such far reaching laws. Molly Gray lied what SCOTUS did. SCOTUS is FINE to have CONGRESS pass all such strict EPA laws on nationwide emissions…..just not by Judges.. She got all VT headline press and almost every Vermonter (liberal) are too lazy or too ignorant to actually read what SCOTUS said. Liberals lie and VT voters buy it hook, line and sinker.

  9. uuhhh – Molly, it’s called “weather manipulation” not climate change. As long as the sun rises in the east and sinks into the west – as long as the sun drops low to the south in the winter and winter days of sun are short and dark, do you think our “climate” will change? Right now we are experiencing the coldest summer I remember, not “global warming”. We fight “weather manipulation” Molly!

  10. Where I grew up, on the farm, we farmers didn’t spend a lot of time reminding people that we were farmers, living on a farm.
    Did I mention what we farmers did every day down on the farm, working hard as farmers?

    What an obnoxious candidate.

  11. Anyone seeking higher office with law credentials who refers to this Court as “foolish and radical” is acting on their political instincts (and their thesaurus) and not on legal principles. Molly has an unexpected pissing contest on her hands with Becca Balint and we will have to see which one has the better thesaurus for their comments on recent SCOTUS decisions.
    Ok, Becca, your turn. If you go by the yard sign count, Becca is ahead by my observation. Remember that in the last election, Molly came out of nowhere and pushed her shopping cart in front of the democrat political checkout line while politely explaining that she just wanted to grab a pack of gum. This did not go over well with many democrats whose favorite candidates have been patiently standing in that line for years. Readers of this forum have a decision to make about whether to vote in the democrat primary and which of these clowns to put in the race for November. Any suggestions about which one will be less harmful to freedom-minded, conservative Vermonters?

    • Rich Lachapelle:
      When being forced to pick from Airhead #1 or Airhead #2, I usually follow the money and decide that way..
      All they are really is puppets anyway, best to know who is pulling their strings.

      • So I pose the question…if “freedom-minded” Vermonters choose to vote in the primary with a democrat ballot, is there a greater advantage to sending Molly or Becca from Vermont to DC?

        • Neither one.. Neither are smart enough.. Becca Balint is from NY.. sick of these democrats out-of-staters coming here and making our state into the state /or country they came from…
          Our state is becoming another Ca,Ill state…Shooting is on the rise.. Let’s get more druggies in Vt, We are losing our state to these democrats, we have a useless RHINO for a Governor who is controlled by the demons, we have a Senator who lives in VA (Leahy) a lying Welch, and a loud mouth commie Sanders and a house full of out-of-staters in the legislation. Vermonters are F—-d…

          • I will of course be voting for Ericka Redick who will easily take the GOP nomination. The track record in modern-day, ignorant Vermont is that whomever the democrat is will be going to Congress. I am asking the question, who is the lesser of those two evils, Molly or Becca?…or to phrase it differently, who would be best to send to Congress and who do we want hanging around Montpelier making more trouble?

        • Rich “Freedom Minded” Vermonters lost a long time ago.
          Vermont is a one party state and everyone knows this.
          This is why Freedom Minded Vermonters leave Vermont to go find freedom in another state.

          • To perpetually maintain the one-party, Dem/Prog state, Vermont proudly has

            1) bloated registered voter lists,

            2) universal mail out of ballots to everyone on that list, and

            3) universal harvesting of ballots to keep in office the Balint and Gray types, who spout the PARTY LINE

  12. If Molly can tell us how much weight the atmosphere has pressing down on her, I can tell her why there’s no such thing as the radiative greenhouse effect. Hence, there’s also no such thing as CO2 greenhouse warming.

    It’s called science backed by observation and evidence.

    If anyone is wondering what the answer is to the question of how much force gravitational acceleration exerts on atmospheric molecules (and hence how much atmospheric weight is pressing down on us,) here’s a hint:


  13. Becca Balint is no better! We cannot just poo poo the competition we need to put forward and promote individuals who would be better on the issues in our articles, letters, comments and tweets. After watching… struggling through VT Digger’s debate for VT’s US Congress I’ve come to be a avid supporter of Ericka Redic. She is good on most, if not all, the issues I care about and seems to have a knowledge of Austrian Economics.

    I hope the interest and enthusiasm will grow and help Ericka to the general election and beat out whoever the democrat nominee is.

  14. “… This issue cannot be left up to judicial interpretation. …”

    Good Gracious Molly, you just let the cat out of the bag ! This is exactly what SCOTUS said about abortion.

    Honestly, are you really that dumb not to have seen this ?

    • Bingo, Steve….THWAP….you caught her :)…..Supreme Court did NOT BAN ABORTION. They merely said it is not a constitutionla issue, since it is NOT mentioned in the Constitution….and as such it is dependant on States to make the laws they wish. The Supreme Court UPHELD the Mississippi law that it can be done up to 15 weeks! Liberals make it seem like MS banned it! That is a lie…something Liberals excel at 🙂

      Ms. Molly Gray is just an “Agenda-Minion-Marcher” doing & saying what she is told …..because if she took just a few minutes to read what the Court said (re: EPA)…you will see the court just ended “Executive Agenda Order Fiat”…. acting as “State Controlled Facism”. The Court simply stated that only Congress can write the the most far reaching laws regarding the EPA….and carbon emissons is it. So pass ALL the EPA laws you want, but in the laws come from CONGRESS….not by “Executive Facist Fiat”.

      • Jeffrey,
        Exactly correct.

        Roe vs Wade was an error by a prior SCOTUS.

        That error was corrected by the present SCOTUS, because it finally had the votes to correct it.

        The people in each state have the right to elect representatives to state legislatures to deal with the abortion issue as the people in each state want it dealt with.

        In time, and with cooperative goodwill, all will be sorted out for the better.

  15. Liberal idiocy never ceases to amaze…They make up what they want, then believe what they want….Then declare all of it true & the law. DID ANY Liberal READ what the Supreme Court said? Nope. Here is a summary quote:

    “The Supreme Court dealt a blow to the executive branch’s ability to regulate carbon emissions, effectively insisting that Congress take back its jurisdiction over environmental regulations…. .”

    All the Court did was say that Biden & his administraioin…(Obama did it too)…OVERSTEPPED their authority to basically DICTATE laws to the EPA, as their agenda see’s fit. The Court DID NOT SHUT ALL EPA regulations down…all the Court stated was such envrio laws cannot be made by Onama, Biden etc….by “Executive Fiat”! That is NOT A DEMOCRACY, but rather a form of ‘State Facism”… The Court once again stated it is the job of CONGRESS (0r the States (re: Roe) to write such wide ranging environmental laws. And if Congress can write it and get it passed…Then Biden can sign it – LEGALLY… and the EPA is on it’s way to do their best to shut most things” fossil….down.

    Good luck trying to explain this simple explanation to any Liberal or Democrat…something is “mis-wired” in their brain connections 🙂

  16. “In my own lifetime, I’ve seen profound changes to Vermont’s climate. Our ski seasons are shorter, and family farms, like the one I grew up on, must navigate increasingly unpredictable growing seasons.”

    Another person who doesn’t understand the difference between weather and climate and intends to make policy based on this ignorance. There should at least be a test for the candidate as well as the voters.

    The things family farms have to navigate are increasingly unpredictable regulations and taxes.

  17. One and a half years as Lt. Governor and off to congress? Please, more climate change and punishing regulations? Another rubber stamp vote for the radical left? This young woman can’t wait to jump into the big leagues with a war chest of money from outside of Vermont. Donations from liberal organizations means the lady will be owned by them and she will vote for them, not Vermonters. A pretty face and well produced commercials cannot make up for the lack of life experience needed in these trying times. This young woman wasn’t even living in Vermont prior to winning election in 2020. This is too much fluff too soon. We need a conservative to represent Vermont. Really, haven’t liberals hurt you enough yet? How’s your savings account? How about $100.00 to fill your gas tank and food prices up 14% or more. Vote for this lady and expect more not less. Her statement on the SC, EPA decision is so wrong she cannot understand how representative government as defined in our constitution works and is the law of the land operates. Congress writes laws, not the EPA or any other agency of the government and the SC court is raining them in.

  18. The only one that appears foolish as well as ignorant is Molly Gray.
    Perhaps she failed to learn in junior high or high school civics,assuming that is still taught in public schools, that agencies are power less to write law as only congress writes law.
    However I think that her ignorance is more a result of the Marxist Left and a direct result of electing such to any office above dog catcher.

Comments are closed.