A group of “children” (as activist lawyers call their clients) filed a federal lawsuit a while ago claiming that a right to a stable climate should be enforced by judicial decree as a postulate of the due process clause of the 14th Amendment, and the federal district court judge in Oregon (figures) denied a motion to dismiss. This lawsuit is so silly I didn’t bother to make note of it here. If the plaintiffs actually won this case, it would essentially mean the end of the Constitution. Are we really supposed to think that federal judges should supervise climate policy? It has worked so well in the case of public schools. More likely it is intended as a way of prying open the doors for trial lawyers to extract tobacco-settlement style exactions from the energy industry.
Guess who else thinks it is silly? The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which yesterday issued a stay on further proceedings at the trial court level pending review by the appeals court. If even the famously flaky 9th Circuit thinks you’re going too far. . .