For God’s sake, it’s for the children…
A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by two Pennsylvania children and an environmental group, which sought to halt the Trump administration from rolling back certain Obama-era climate regulations. The judge ruled that he did not have the authority to dictate such matters to the White House.
In Philadelphia, Judge Paul Diamond, a George W. Bush appointee, dismissed the lawsuit brought by two boys — aged 7 and 11 at the time the suit was brought in November of 2017 — and the radical climate-alarmist group Clean Air Council. Diamond ruled that the plaintiffs did not have a due process right to what they called, “a life-sustaining climate system.”
In the lawsuit, attorneys for the children and the Clean Air Council alleged that any scholarship contrary to the climate change “consensus” is necessarily “junk science.”
Attorneys for the defendants, which include Trump, Energy Secretary Rick Perry, former Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt, and several others, had made a motion for dismissal.
“Plaintiffs disagreement with defendants is a policy debate best left to the political process,” Diamond wrote. “Because I have neither the authority nor the inclination to assume control of the Executive Branch, I will grant defendant’s motion.”
The judge further stated that the plaintiffs were effectively asking him to “supervise any actions the President and his appointees take that might touch on the environment.” Diamond also stated that the two boys involved in the suit could not trace their alleged severe allergies or asthma back to White House policies.
Diamond also rebuked U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken’s 2016 decision in Juliana v. the United States stating that another group of children had a constitutional right to a livable climate. Aiken was the first judge to find that such a right existed. “The Juliana Court certainly contravened or ignored longstanding authority,” Diamond wrote.
The judge made it clear that the courts are not the place to have climate arguments. “Plaintiffs seek to create an entirely new doctrine — investing the Federal Government with an affirmative duty to protect all land and resources within the United States,” Diamond wrote. “The Juliana Court alone has recognized this new doctrine. Again, that Court’s reasoning is less than persuasive.”
Gee, you mean it’s not in the federal government’s purview to rule over the climate? What a concept!
The Clean Air Council responded, saying that it “respectfully disagrees with the decision,” and is considering other options at this time. In a statement, the head of the group, Joseph Minott said, “The Trump administration continues to rely on junk science to implement reckless climate-change policies in the face of indisputable U.S. and international scientific consensus.”
“These acts of deliberate indifference are increasing U.S. contributions to climate change, thereby increasing the frequency and intensity of its life-threatening effects, and violating our constitutional rights,” Minott complained.
Minott and his Clean Air Council mafia are not the only ones using children as pawns in their attempts to strongarm the courts, the political system, and we-the-people to bow to their demands. Also portraying children as victims in frivolous lawsuits is a group known as Our Children’s Trust, the group that was responsible for the Juliana case in Oregon.
Our Children’s Trust is involved in climate lawsuits — all of which use children as plaintiffs — in nine states, including Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Maine, Massachusetts, New Mexico, Washington, and the aforementioned Oregon case. They also support climate lawsuits in all 50 states and in countries all over the world.
According to the mission statement of Our Children’s Trust, “We lead a game-changing legal campaign seeking systemic, science-based emissions reductions and climate recovery at all levels of government.” Of course, what they’re actually doing is using children in order to further a socialist political agenda — they want government to control every aspect of life, with leftists at the helm.
More leftists are fighting dirty, as leftists are wont to do. It’s despicable to use children in this way, but the young are just attention-gaining tools to them.
There’s a reason that leftists fight so hard on Supreme Court nominations and other federal court appointments. The courts are their last line of defense in these political fights. When all else fails, they sue.
And it’s even better if they can claim, “It’s for the children.”