MRCTV readers and viewers likely know that for nearly 10 years, we have tried to sound the alarm about the anti-constitutional, irrational, and destructive moves that collectivists in both major political parties, bureaucrats in national and state offices, plotting predators in multinational corporations, and corrupt “scientists” have been making to shut down cheap, portable, relatively safe, plentiful petrochemical energy and replace it with centrally-controlled, inefficient, dangerous, so-called “green alternatives” such as wind-farms and solar-fields that would feed dangerous and unreliable electric vehicles and home-heat along an unreliable series of fire-hazard electric grids.
From the very foundation of it – the unconstitutional, arrogant, idea that there must be a centralized “energy policy” dictated on us from D.C. – to Barack Obama pushing his 2008 threat that no one would be able to build a new coal electricity-provision plant because his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) “regulations” (a cute euphemism for fascist commands) would make that impossible, to the subsequent throttling of the coal industry in places like Pennsylvania and West Virginia, to the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline, to the Biden Administration subsidizing electric vehicles, and pushing to virtually eliminate legal sales of the internal combustion car by 2035, to international, central bank, and state political moves to establish a fraudulent “cost of carbon” and pretend there is a market for “carbon credits,” the policies and provisions have been poison, predicated on a “climate change apocalypse” that its promoters claim is coming and about which they accuse skeptics of being, essentially, religious apostates.
And now, one of the few speed-bumps Americans might hope to slow down this steamroller momentarily has let us down.
The Supreme Court of the United States on Wednesday voted 7-1 not to grant the request by eight groups of state and business-based plaintiffs to block the EPA from enforcing onerous new “emissions” commands on coal and natural gas-based power plants while the plaintiffs’ original challenge moves through lower federal courts.
As Kaitlin Lewis reports for Newsweek:
“The U.S. Supreme Court refused to put a hold on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) new rule regarding greenhouse gas emissions standards for power plants as some states challenge the law's legality.
Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas broke with the rest of the court in the decision on Wednesday, according to the court's opinion. Justices ruled in a 7-1 vote that it was not necessary to grant an emergency stay request from West Virginia, Indiana and dozens of other states and industry groups to halt the EPA rule while litigation on the issue continues in lower court.”
Curiously, Justice Samuel Alito did not take part in the decision.
Writes Lewis:
“The EPA rule, which the Biden administration passed in April, requires that new and existing coal and natural gas power plants cut or capture 90 percent of their climate pollution by 2032.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who wrote the court's opinion, said that since the ‘applicants need not start compliance work’ related to the EPA standards until next summer, ‘they are unlikely to suffer irreparable harm before the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit decides the merits.’"
For those who stand for a strict reading of the Constitution, who recognize the unconstitutional nature of the Nixon-created EPA and how it warps and usurps the idea of private property rights and traditional tort law, the majority decision to stay out of the case because the EPA isn’t going to trigger “compliance work” until next summer should seem irrelevant. It is the usurpation of property rights, the added attack on the Constitution, and the very conceit that the feds can dictate new “carbon capture” tech that already stand as unacceptable.
And journalist Lewis’ parroting of the unsupported term “climate pollution” just adds to the problem.
It is a problem fueled (pun intended) by both that kind of intellectual falsity and the immoral, unconstitutional mandates imposed by the EPA on states and private businesses.
“West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey said in a statement that those challenging the EPA rule ‘will continue to fight through the merits phase and prove this rule strips the states of important discretion while forcing plants to use technologies that don't work in the real world.’”
But, surely, the EPA knows best, and there’s no long-term, top-down, internationalist strategy to strangle so-called “fossil fuel” energy that, for nearly 200 years, has provided cheap power to generations and contributed to incredible progress for human living standards and prosperity. Surely, the EPA is “helping” us… Right?
"Here, the EPA again is trying to transform the nation's entire grid, forcing power plants to shutter," Morrisey added.”
Well said.
As Lewis notes:
“The states and industry partners who are seeking to block the EPA rule have argued that the agency has not proved that the regulations would curtail emissions to the degree the federal government claims.”
But the proof or lack of proof for the mandates “curtailing emissions to the degree the federal government claims” is not really the heart of the problem. At the heart of the problem is the unproven claim that the “emissions” are pushing a climate apocalypse, the existence of the EPA, itself, and how the EPA undercuts what in human history used to be necessary to block or punish human activity: proof of that activity damaging a person or his property.
Related: Feds Announce Pilot Program For Major U.S. Banks To 'Manage Climate-Related Financial Risks'
Thanks to Nixon’s monstrous creation, thousands of Americans have been prevented from peacefully using their private property, trillions of dollars in market opportunities have been crushed, and countless lives have been harmed.
And thanks to the EPA and the anti-market mentality behind it, few students or pop media watchers are aware that the free market is the best driver of conservation.
The market incentivizes conservation and penalizes waste. It incentivizes protection and long-term husbandry of resources and penalizes those who recklessly harm the property or lives of others.
Instead, Nixon’s creation slid in the falsehood that the centralized political machine can manage and control everything, prevent private action before any harm is proven, and force people to adopt expensive tech even when it will destroy their bottom line.
That sound more like a mafia than anything else.
One reassuring point in this SCOTUS decision comes from Justice Kavanaugh:
“Kavanaugh said in the court's brief order on Wednesday that the ‘applicants have shown a strong likelihood of success on the merits as to at least some of their challenges’ to the EPA's rule.”
But the question of the EPA, itself, is not part of the court’s calculus.
Some might claim that the EPA “rules” are necessary because many of the energy plants are tied to state-created corporations or run by the states, themselves.
But the only provision in the U.S. Constitution that allows for addressing a conflict that might arise from state to state is the “Interstate Commerce” clause, found in Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution, and it is supposed to be a remedial provision, an “after-the-fact” provision that allows States (capital S) as entities to resolve trade disputes by turning to Congress.
Under the EPA “pre-crime” regulatory schema, the EPA tells people how and with what they can conduct their energy-provision business.
That’s not even close to what the Founders envisioned, and it’s about time that people – especially SCOTUS judges – acknowledge this fact.
Our future, and the principles of freedom, depend on it.
Follow MRCTV on X!
The Biden-Harris administration is sending a mother to jail for 3.5 years for protesting the murder of babies outside an abortion clinic. https://t.co/Mccy8RbxmU
— MRCTV (@mrctv) October 20, 2024