Court blocks Bush changes to Clean Air Act

CBS MarketWatch.com ^ | 12/24/03 | Tim Rostan

[SierraWasp]

12:59PM Court blocks Bush changes to Clean Air Act by Tim Rostan

CHICAGO (CBS.MW) -- A federal appeals court has temporarily blocked the Bush administration's planned revisions to the Clean Air Act. Critics have argued that revisions to the legislation, which was passed in 1963 and revised several times since, would undercut air-quality protections by allowing increased pollution. The challenge to the administration's revisions was initiated by state attorneys general.

[SierraWasp]

"The challenge to the administration's revisions was initiated by state attorneys general."

No doubt led by CA's Lockear!!! (deliberately mis-spelled!)

[SierraWasp]

Here's a Christmas Present for our fearless leader!!!

Ping to the power pingers.

[RandallFlagg]

WTF?!?!

This tyrranical judiciary needs to be put down!

[bolobaby]

I'm guessing the 9th circuit... who's with me on that one?

[farmfriend]

Rights, farms, environment ping.

Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.

[dighton]

Three-judge panel, U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for D.C.

[Jean S]

More from the AP:

       www.sfgate.com        Return to regular view

AP NewsBreak: Appeals court blocks Bush administration clean air changes
JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
Wednesday, December 24, 2003
©2003 Associated Press

URL: sfgate.com/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/12/24/national1317EST0580.DTL

(12-24) 10:17 PST WASHINGTON (AP) --

A federal appeals court on Wednesday blocked new Bush administration changes to the Clean Air Act from going into effect the next day, in a challenge from state attorneys general and cities that argued they would harm the environment and public health.

The Environmental Protection Agency rule would have made it easier for utilities, refineries and other industrial facilities to make repairs in the name of "routine maintenance" without installing additional pollution controls.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued an order that blocks the rules from going into effect until the legal challenge from the states and cities is heard, a process likely to last months.

The court's decision blocks at least temporarily one of the Bush administration's major environmental decisions. The court's justices said the challengers "demonstrated the irreparable harm and likelihood of success" of their case, which are required to stop the rule from taking effect.

EPA proposed the rule in December, the then-acting administrator signed it in August and it was made final in October. It was due to have gone into effect this week.

Bringing suit were attorneys general for 12 states -- Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin -- and legal officers for New York City, Washington, San Francisco, New Haven and a host of other cities in Connecticut.

©2003 Associated Press  

[SierraWasp]

Looks like I was wrong about CA's Lockyear!!! (this time)

[ridesthemiles]

No doubt led by CA's Lockear!!! (deliberately mis-spelled!)

I doubt this from Calif and Lock-ear. This federal court is in Chicago, and I think that is a different jurisdiction from Calif.

[Trust but Verify]

Don't think this was the 9th. Story is out of Chicago.

[CedarDave]

The court's justices said the challengers "demonstrated the irreparable harm and likelihood of success" of their case, which are required to stop the rule from taking effect.

Of course the challengers have a likelihood of success with this case. The courts are mostly full of feel-good liberal judges who bring their bias to the bench and don't mind ignoring the constitution or making new law when it suits them.

[freekitty]

I see the Clintoons were busy little bees making sure their judges were set up before they left.

Will someone please take them off the stage so we can put them in jail where justice will finally be done?

[Steve_Seattle]

I wonder what the legal basis for this ruling is? As usual with court cases, the article does not spell it out in any detail.

[Steve_Seattle]

"This federal court is in Chicago"

The article says its the DC court.

[rudypoot]

I agree. Where is the jurisdiction? Where is the administration breaking a law?

[Steve_Seattle]

"irreparable harm"

The plaintiffs must have been lying, because it's hard to see how a policy which would reduce toxic emmissions by 70% over 15 years is doing irreparable harm.

[Teacher317]

A federal appeals court on Wednesday blocked new Bush administration changes to the Clean Air Act from going into effect the next day, in a challenge from state attorneys general and cities that argued they would harm the environment and public health.

Are you blind? Don't you know that it is the court's Constitutional duty to continually second-guess the other two branches of government, and stop any legislation that could harm the desert pygmy rat?!

/S>