Skip to comments.
Governor Rick Perry To Sue the EPA
JDJournal ^
| Fri, Feb 19, 2010
Posted on 02/19/2010 1:55:25 PM PST by Delacon
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-55 next last
Go get em Rick! Hopefully SCOTUS will rule the EPA's actions as unconstitutional.
1
posted on
02/19/2010 1:55:25 PM PST
by
Delacon
To: Delacon
Was the carbon dioxide is a pollutant court minus Alito and Roberts?
2
posted on
02/19/2010 2:14:17 PM PST
by
Sybeck1
(POTUS : Punk of the United States)
To: Delacon
Hopefully this will open the floodgates for other states to file similar lawsuits.
3
posted on
02/19/2010 2:16:35 PM PST
by
Man50D
(Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
To: Delacon
Carbon dioxide and water are not pollutants. Good for Perry.
4
posted on
02/19/2010 2:17:44 PM PST
by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: Delacon
I welcome this, but note that this is very clearly a signal that Perry will be trying to run for President.
5
posted on
02/19/2010 2:18:20 PM PST
by
Jewbacca
(The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
To: Delacon
Is this just election year shenanigans or is he going to follow this through?
6
posted on
02/19/2010 2:19:13 PM PST
by
BJClinton
(0bama is not the anti-christ. Satan wouldn't be such a screw up.)
To: Delacon
Peabody Energy Co. is also challenging the EPA in court.
Lemme find the link.
7
posted on
02/19/2010 2:24:18 PM PST
by
Roccus
(POLITICIAN.....................a four letter word spelled with ten letters.)
To: Roccus
So is Virginia.
We’re going after the goofballs.
To: pissant; CedarDave; 2ndDivisionVet; steelyourfaith; Sub-Driver; xcamel; Tolerance Sucks Rocks; ...
9
posted on
02/19/2010 2:26:31 PM PST
by
Delacon
("The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." H. L. Mencken)
To: Roccus
10
posted on
02/19/2010 2:26:57 PM PST
by
Roccus
(POLITICIAN.....................a four letter word spelled with ten letters.)
To: BJClinton
Must be election year for governor in Texas....
11
posted on
02/19/2010 2:27:59 PM PST
by
eartick
(Been to the line in the sand and liked it)
To: TheMom; humblegunner; Eaker; thackney; davetex; mnehring; Squantos
Perry ping.
12
posted on
02/19/2010 2:28:36 PM PST
by
Allegra
(It doesn't matter what this tagline says...the liberals are going to call it "racist.")
To: Delacon
13
posted on
02/19/2010 2:30:29 PM PST
by
rae4palin
(islam is of the devil)
To: eartick
Yep, he didn't start all his succession / 10th amendment talk until the election cycle. This is just another political ploy to keep his butt in the Gov. mansion.
To: Jewbacca
I welcome this, but note that this is very clearly a signal that Perry will be trying to run for President.Yep, and that's very scary. He will say anything to get elected. He would be a liberal if he thought that was the easiest way to power.
15
posted on
02/19/2010 2:33:12 PM PST
by
dfwgator
To: servantboy777; All
He is also a possible presidential candidate. I would like feedback on what freepers think about him.
16
posted on
02/19/2010 2:33:17 PM PST
by
Delacon
("The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." H. L. Mencken)
To: Delacon; markomalley; Carlucci; grey_whiskers; meyer; WL-law; Para-Ord.45; Desdemona; ...
17
posted on
02/19/2010 2:33:36 PM PST
by
steelyourfaith
(FReepers were opposed to Obama even before it was cool to be against Obama.)
To: Delacon
Dear Delacon,
I'm not an expert in this, but from what I've read, because the EPA’s prospective regulation of carbon would be through the regulatory process rather than as a result of carbon regulation laws passed by the Congress, it's easier to successfully have them struck down in court.
My own understanding is that if Congress were to find that carbon was a danger and needed to be regulated, and then passed specific laws regulating carbon, the courts would give high deference to such legislation.
The EPA would merely be obeying the law's explicit instructions, and would rely on Congress's findings of fact.
But because the current attempt is to do it through the regulatory process, the EPA derives its power to regulate carbon not via direct legislation dealing specifically with carbon, but via laws mandating regulation of pollutants, generally. The EPA, then, is relying directly on the science to support its regulations, not on the direct instructions of Congress.
Thus, a lawsuit that challenges the science on which the EPA relies has a much better chance of success.
Or, that's how I understand it.
sitetest
18
posted on
02/19/2010 2:34:50 PM PST
by
sitetest
( If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
To: Delacon
The EPA needs to be dismantled, everybody fired and then sued into the ground and covered with 1000 tons of rocks.
They and their kind are what’s wrong with our gov.
They hate America and what we were a long time ago!
19
posted on
02/19/2010 2:37:31 PM PST
by
LadyPilgrim
((Lifted up was He to die; It is finished was His cry; Hallelujah what a Savior!!!!!! ))
To: steelyourfaith
There’s another one for your list in post #10
20
posted on
02/19/2010 2:37:40 PM PST
by
Roccus
(POLITICIAN.....................a four letter word spelled with ten letters.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-55 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson