SoylentNews

The Supreme Court Just Allowed a Major Climate Lawsuit to Go Ahead

posted by martyb on Saturday November 03 2018, @08:09PM   
from the cool-it dept.

upstart writes in with a submission via IRC for chromas

The Supreme Court just allowed a major climate lawsuit to go ahead

In a surprise decision late Friday, the Supreme Court cleared the way for Juliana v. US, a major lawsuit filed by young people against the US government for failing to limit the effects of climate change. The case may now go to trial in a lower court after the Supreme Court’s extremely unusual move last month to temporarily block the proceeding.

The case includes 21 plaintiffs between the ages of 11 and 22, who began testing the idea that a safe climate is a civil right when the suit was first filed in 2015. It argues that the US government pursued policies that harmed the climate, thereby robbing the children of a “climate system capable of sustaining human life.” As redress, they want the government to take action to fight climate change.

“The youth of our nation won an important decision today from the Supreme Court that shows even the most powerful government in the world must follow the rules and process of litigation in our democracy,” the plaintiffs said Friday in a statement. “We have asked the District Court for an immediate status conference to get Juliana v. US back on track for trial in the next week.”

A lower court ruled earlier this year the case could go to trial, and that trial was expected begin at the United States District Court in Oregon on Monday, October 29.

But then late last month, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts issued a temporary stay of the case to consider a request from the Justice Department for a stay to halt the case. The Supreme Court’s temporary stay sent the plaintiffs scrambling to put together a brief in time to keep the case moving forward on schedule.

On Friday, the court denied the government’s request for a stay, though Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch would have granted the application, according to the court order. The Supreme Court also suggested that a federal appeals court should consider appeals on other grounds before the case heads to trial in district court.

The court, however, strongly suggests that interlocutory appeal of the district court's order on dispositive motions—in plain English, immediate appeal of some key legal questions before the trial—should happen. (Which would mean no trial unless that ruling is upheld on appeal.) pic.twitter.com/011vDPAucT

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner) November 2, 2018

[...] For climate change activists, the courtroom is one of the few remaining options for enacting policies to limit greenhouse gases, as the White House scarcely acknowledges climate change and Congress remains deadlocked. The plaintiffs and the defendants in the children’s climate lawsuit will now prepare for trial, though a new date has not yet been set.

Also at TheHill and Reuters

---

Original Submission

• Need more LOYAL Republicans in SC & Congress!!!! Need more LOYAL Republicans in SC & Congress!!!! (Score: 4, Interesting) by realDonaldTrump on Saturday November 03 2018, @09:45PM (4 children)

  by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Saturday November 03 2018, @09:45PM (#757393) Homepage Journal

  I'll tell you, this is why it's so important to VOTE. Because when they put somebody in SC, it's FOR LIFE. And he or she -- especially she -- can be in there for a really long time. Doing a lot of damage to our Country. And there's nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people -- maybe there is, I don’t know. That's why we need more LOYAL Republicans in our House & Senate (buh bye Paul!!). To get my appointments through much more quickly -- so important. And to IMPEACH the bad judges. The Climate Hoax judges, the Open Boarders judges, the SLOW judges, and many more. Our Courts are a DISASTER. I'm working very hard to fix them. To make them great again -- Separate but Equal. But I need you to GET OUT AND VOTE Tuesday!!! Vote.GOP [vote.gop]

  Starting Score:	1		point
  Moderation		+2
  Interesting=1, Funny=1, Total=2
  Extra 'Interesting' Modifier		0
  Karma-Bonus Modifier		+1
  Total Score:		4

• Re:Need more LOYAL Republicans in SC & Congress!!! (Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 03 2018, @09:59PM

  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 03 2018, @09:59PM (#757403)

  the Open Boarders judges

  Idiot, you are the one that is open for Boarders, in your hotels.

  Parent

• Re:Need more LOYAL Republicans in SC & Congress!!! (Score: 3, Informative) by captain normal on Sunday November 04 2018, @03:23AM

  by captain normal (2205) on Sunday November 04 2018, @03:23AM (#757496)

  Impeachment can very well be a 2 way street. Did anyone ever tell you to be careful what you wish for?

  --
  When life isn't going right, go left.

  Parent

• Re:Need more LOYAL Republicans in SC & Congress!!! (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 04 2018, @05:37AM

  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 04 2018, @05:37AM (#757513)

  Although the Second Amendment people -- maybe there is, I don’t know.

  Leon Trotsky had an idea [marxists.org] what the Second Amendment people will need to do:

  The politicians of the Second and Third Internationals as well as the bureaucrats of the trade unions, consciously close their eyes to the bourgeoisie’s private army; otherwise they could not preserve their alliance with it for even twenty-four hours. The reformists systematically implant in the minds of the workers the notion that the sacredness of democracy is best guaranteed when the bourgeoisie is armed to the teeth and the workers are unarmed.

  The duty of the Fourth International is to put an end to such slavish polices once and for all. The petty bourgeois democrats – including Social Democrats, Stalinists and Anarchists – yell louder about the struggle against fascism the more cravenly they capitulate to it in actuality. Only armed workers’ detachments, who feel the support of tens of millions of toilers behind them, can successfully prevail against the fascist bands. The struggle against fascism does not start in the liberal editorial office but in the factory – and ends in the street. Scabs and private gunmen in factory plants are the basic nuclei of the fascist army. Strike pickets are the basic nuclei of the proletarian army. This is our point of departure. In connection with every strike and street demonstration, it is imperative to propagate the necessity of creating workers’ groups for self-defense. It is necessary to write this slogan into the program of the revolutionary wing of the trade unions. It is imperative wherever possible, beginning with the youth groups, to organize groups for self-defense, to drill and acquaint them with the use of arms.

  A new upsurge of the mass movement should serve not only to increase the number of these units but also to unite them according to neighborhoods, cities, regions. It is necessary to give organized expression to the valid hatred of the workers toward scabs and bands of gangsters and fascists. It is necessary to advance the slogan of a workers’ militia as the one serious guarantee for the inviolability of workers’ organizations, meetings and press.

  Parent

• poliitics in not a sport (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 05 2018, @01:48PM

  by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 05 2018, @01:48PM (#757973)

  Need more LOYAL Republicans in SC & Congress!!!!

  <sarcasm>Yes, but of course. The running of a country is a team sport!! Our team good, other team DUMB! </sarcasm>

  No, the foundation principal of the USA is a representational government. Each person gets to choose who they want to represent them. What you are advocating is a consolidation of power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely [phrases.org.uk].

  I'll tell you, this is why it's so important to VOTE. Because when they put somebody in SC, it's FOR LIFE. And he or she -- especially she -- can be in there for a really long time. Doing a lot of damage to our Country. And there's nothing you can do, folks. ... That's why we need more LOYAL Republicans in our House & Senate (buh bye Paul!!). To get my appointments through much more quickly -- so important.

  There are 3 branches to the US government: executive, legislative, and judicial. Each is intended to act as a check on the others.

  What you are suggesting is that the judicial branch should be stacked with politically loyal people so as to have them "rubber stamp" what you want to do. Ditto for the legislative branch.

  How about, I don't know, ask the public to elect who they think will best represent THEIR interests? Possibly even someone who looks to the best long-term interests of the entire country instead of what is best able to get YOU what YOU want.

  An axe can do "a lot of damage". But, used properly, it can be a powerful tool.

  A Supreme Court that is filled with people who are politically-aligned with the executive and legislative branches would no longer serve as a practical check on those branches' actions.

  So, all the more reason to not pick teams, and all the more reason to insist the Supreme Court perform their critical role by keeping independent.

  Separate but equal

  You mean this? Separate but equal [wikipedia.org]? The critical part is the last paragraph which I've highlighted for you:

  Separate but equal was a legal doctrine in United States constitutional law according to which racial segregation did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which guaranteed "equal protection" under the law to all people. Under the doctrine, as long as the facilities provided to each race were equal, state and local governments could require that services, facilities, public accommodations, housing, medical care, education, employment, and transportation be segregated by race, which was already the case throughout the former Confederacy. The phrase was derived from a Louisiana law of 1890, although the law actually used the phrase "equal but separate".

  The doctrine was confirmed in the Plessy v. Ferguson Supreme Court decision of 1896, which allowed state-sponsored segregation. Though segregation laws existed before that case, the decision emboldened segregation states during the Jim Crow era, which had commenced in 1876 and supplanted the Black Codes, which restricted the civil rights and civil liberties of African-Americans during the Reconstruction Era.

  In practice the separate facilities provided to African Americans were rarely equal; usually they were not even close to equal, or they did not exist at all. For example, according to the 1934–36 report of the Florida Superintendent of Public Instruction, the value of "white school property" in the state was $70,543,000, while the value of African-American school property was $4,900,000. The report says that "in a few south Florida counties and in most north Florida counties many Negro schools are housed in churches, shacks, and lodges, and have no toilets, water supply, desks, blackboards, etc. [See Station One School.] Counties use these schools as a means to get State funds and yet these counties invest little or nothing in them." High school education for African Americans was provided in only 28 of Florida's 67 counties.

  The doctrine of separate but equal was overturned by a series of Supreme Court decisions, starting with Brown v. Board of Education of 1954. However, the overturning of segregation laws in the United States was a long process that lasted through much of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, involving federal legislation (especially the Civil Rights Act of 1964), and many court cases.

  Sounds to me like you are advocating a return to racism. So SAD!

  Parent