Supreme Court pressures EPA to cut carbon emissions

[fushigi]

Environmentalists hail Supreme Court ruling on carbon - International Herald Tribune

The new ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on carbon dioxide emissions is a strong rebuke to the Bush administration, which has maintained that it does not have the right to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, and that even if it did, it would not use the authority. The ruling does not force the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate auto emissions, but the agency would almost certainly face further legal action if it fails to do so. In one of its most important environmental decisions in years, the Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 on Monday that the agency has the authority to regulate heat-trapping gases in automobile emissions.

Repubs will call it "legislation from the bench," but there's a step in the right direction.

Gotta love those 5-4 Supreme Court decisions, eh Bush?

[Technosoul]

So lets us say that science demonstrates that global warming can cause stronger hurricanes and a city suffers damage from one of those stronger then normal hurricanes then they can sue the EPA for damages, in a class action, or the administration governing the EPA?

Folks suffering from cancer and breathing problems could sue the EPA for not preventing the polutions that cause cancer?

Other countries such as Canada could take legal action if the USA polutes their country with our auto emmisions, as winds blow it all over the boarderline?

Did the Supreme Court refer to any Consitutional reason for that ruleing or is it based on other legal actions from the past?