Posted on 08/11/2005 3:46:51 PM PDT by Crackingham
Some loud voices on the Green Left the Sierra Club, Earthjustice, and Friends of the Earth are going after John Roberts. Listen in. Their yelling reveals a lot about the current state of the environmental movement. It also indicates what President Bush should expect in spades if in the future he nominates a judge with a longer environmental record.
The bone of contention that the enviros are currently gnawing at is Robertss minority opinion in Rancho Viejo v. Norton. The Sierra Club complains that Roberts strongly implied that Congress does not have the Constitutional authority to protect certain species under the Endangered Species Act. Earthjustice (formerly the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund) warns that in a key environmental case, Judge Roberts questioned the constitutionality of Endangered Species Act safeguards. Based on that, Earthjustice sent out an e-mail claiming that much of what we know about Judge Roberts is quite troubling. And Friends of the Earth claims that a recent case dealing with the Endangered Species Act raises troubling concerns about Roberts commitment to upholding Congresss constitutional right to pass laws that protect our air, land and water.
Rancho Viejo v. Norton really shouldnt rate high in propaganda value for Robertss opponents. The 2003 case concerned a land developer, Rancho Viejo, whose plans to build residential housing near San Diego were thwarted because they threatened the habitat of the Southwestern Arroyo Toad, a species protected by the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Contrary to the Sierra Club, Judge Roberts never said Congress had no power to protect certain species. Rather, because the Constitution permits Congress to regulate interstate commerce, Roberts questioned whether Congress has the authority to regulate a species of toad that lives only in California.
Heres whats pertinent: (1) This case concerns whether amphibian rights are more important than a homebuilders, and (2) Judge Roberts raised reasonable questions about the limits of federal power. Does that make Roberts a right-wing nut job? Or does it say something about the environmental groups? Dont expect the mainstream media to give you the right answer.
Its clear that environmental groups have never regarded the ESA simply as a legal process to protect species. For them its the enforcement mechanism of their philosophical convictions, in particular of an ideology called Deep Ecology. Deep Ecology is the construct of a Norwegian philosopher, Arne Naess, who carried to extremes the not unreasonable assertion that all living things have an intrinsic worth. But heres what Naess said: The right of all forms [of life] to live is a universal right which cannot be quantified. He also said, No single species of living being has more of this particular right to live and unfold than any other species.
Of course it does!! Can't you all see what the appointment of John Roberts to the USSC willdo to the Southwestern Arroyo Toad?!?! /sarc off
So unwind the tinfoil a bit. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.