SCOTUS Writing More Laws

[Wirey]

U.S. Supreme Court rules against EPA's limits on power plants' mercury emissions - Technology & Science - CBC News

After the gay marriage fiasco, I can't wait to hear the Republican outburst at this one! How dare SCOTUS invent a law that didn't exist before?

 

[metis]

Well, I think Scalia stated it well on behalf of most on the right, namely that money is more important than human health. Is there really any surprise here?

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, I think Scalia stated it well on behalf of most on the right, namely that money is more important than human health. Is there really any surprise here?

That isn't an accurate representation of the linked article.
Scalia & the other justices all appear to favor a cost-v-benefit analysis.
The questions appear to be about when the analysis was made & the cost/benefit ratio.
The linked article lacks sufficient info to understand the legal reasoning behind the decision.

 

[dust1n]

"Writing for the court, Justice Antonin Scalia said it is not appropriate to impose billions of dollars of economic costs in return for a few dollars in health or environmental benefits. He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan said it was enough that the EPA considered costs at later stages of the process. She was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor.

In the case of mercury, the costs of installing and operating equipment to remove the pollutants before they are dispersed into the air are hefty — $9.6 billion US a year, the EPA found.

But the benefits are much greater, $37 billion to $90 billion annually, the agency said. The savings stem from the prevention of up to 11,000 deaths, 4,700 nonfatal heart attacks and 540,000 lost days of work, the EPA said. Mercury accumulates in fish and is especially dangerous to pregnant or breastfeeding women, and young children, because of concern that too much could harm a developing brain."

The party I'm going to throw at Scalia's death...

 

[Revoltingest]

"Writing for the court, Justice Antonin Scalia said it is not appropriate to impose billions of dollars of economic costs in return for a few dollars in health or environmental benefits. He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan said it was enough that the EPA considered costs at later stages of the process. She was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor.

In the case of mercury, the costs of installing and operating equipment to remove the pollutants before they are dispersed into the air are hefty — $9.6 billion US a year, the EPA found.

But the benefits are much greater, $37 billion to $90 billion annually, the agency said. The savings stem from the prevention of up to 11,000 deaths, 4,700 nonfatal heart attacks and 540,000 lost days of work, the EPA said. Mercury accumulates in fish and is especially dangerous to pregnant or breastfeeding women, and young children, because of concern that too much could harm a developing brain."

The party I'm going to throw at Scalia's death...

FYI, I consider cutting pollution to be very libertarian.
People who drink water & breathe air shouldn't have others inserting lead, mercury, etc.
We can't eliminate the threats, but we can reasonably regulate them.

 

[Nietzsche]

FYI, I consider cutting pollution to be very libertarian.
People who drink water & breathe air shouldn't have others inserting lead, mercury, etc.
We can't eliminate the threats, but we can reasonably regulate them.

Oh my god. You have no idea how refreshing that is to hear when 90% of American Libertarians seem to be nothing but "CORPORATIONS GOOD, GUBBERMINT BAD" regardless of what either are actually doing.

 

[Revoltingest]

Oh my god. You have no idea how refreshing that is to hear when 90% of American Libertarians seem to be nothing but "CORPORATIONS GOOD, GUBBERMINT BAD" regardless of what either are actually doing.

We're often seen only as the stereotypes proffered by people frightened by liberty.

Our motto.....your right to swing your arms ends where your neighbor's nose begins....
could be interpreted as.....your right to pour motor oil on the ground ends where your neighbor's aquifer begins.

 

[Nietzsche]

We're often seen only as the stereotypes proffered by people frightened by liberty.

Our motto.....your right to swing your arms ends where your neighbor's nose begins....
could be interpreted as.....your right to pour motor oil on the ground ends where your neighbor's aquifer begins.

Ehhhh, I would argue that if more Libertarians actually were that way, the movement in this country wouldn't be so fruitless. As it stands, it at least seems like the majority of American Libertarians are just Republicans who think their party isn't pro-business enough.

 

[Revoltingest]

Ehhhh, I would argue that if more Libertarians actually were that way, the movement in this country wouldn't be so fruitless. As it stands, it at least seems like the majority of American Libertarians are just Republicans who think their party isn't pro-business enough.

Yes, misconceptions like that one abound.
Democrats often push them....perhaps because they're threatened by our being more socially liberal then they.
Check out our party platform.
You'll find that unlike Pubs & Dems, we would....
- End the War On Drugs.
- End overseas adventurism, eg, wars, police action, nation building
- Lower taxes.

There's much you can find where we'd disagree.
But tis best to ignore the disingenuous ravings of our detractors, & despise us for who we really are.
That leads to far more interesting discussions, eh.

 

[esmith]

Yes, misconceptions like that one abound.
Democrats often push them....perhaps because they're threatened by our being more socially liberal then they.
Check out our party platform.
You'll find that unlike Pubs & Dems, we would....
- End the War On Drugs.
- End overseas adventurism, eg, wars, police action, nation building
- Lower taxes.

There's much you can find where we'd disagree.
But tis best to ignore the disingenuous ravings of our detractors, & despise us for who we really are.
That leads to far more interesting discussions, eh.

What's that line from the movie "A Few Good Men"?

 

[Revoltingest]

What's that line from the movie "A Few Good Men"?

What line?

 

[JFish123]

You know what we need in this country? More laws I mean we wouldn't be able to tie our shoes without the governments help
My guess, polygamy is next