Hook ’em Horns: Texas sues EPA anew on climate

December 22, 2010

The state of Texas has filed a new lawsuit against the EPA and the climate rules slate to take effect on Jan. 2.

Following the rejection of a request for a stay of the EPA rules by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Texas has filed its new effort to stay the rules in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

In petitioning the court to review the EPA’s action, Texas claims:

The GHG SIP Call is contrary to both the Clean Air Act and the Constitution. Recognizing the proper role of the States, the Clean Air Act declares pollution prevention to be “the primary responsibility of States and local governments,” and not the federal government. 42 U.S.C. § 7401(a)(3). EPA rejects that approach and seeks to deprive Texas of its right to manage its air resources. It does so by unlawfully replacing a properly-approved Texas SIP, despite Texas’ strong track record of reducing pollution and improving air quality in the State. The United States Constitution also denies the federal government the authority to commandeer the States to carry out its ends, but here EPA attempts just that by threatening Texas with severe economic harm unless the State adopts, on an unrealistic timeline, EPA’s greenhouse gas regulations, which are themselves unlawful.

The GHG SIP Call is arbitrary and capricious and is contrary to the Clean Air Act. The State of Texas is directly and immediately harmed by the GHG SIP Call because it purports to rescind the State of Texas’ permitting authority under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration program, 42 U.S.C. § 7470 et seq., and, thereby, to impose a construction moratorium on greenhouse gas sources. This action causes Texas and its citizens great and immediate injury, in the form of forgone business investment, lost jobs, lost tax revenues, and administrative expenses. By contrast, this regulation accomplishes no discemable environmental benefit. The amount of greenhouse gas emissions that would be avoided under this regulation is miniscule; indeed, it is impossible to even measure. The State of Texas therefore reserves the right to request that the Court stay the GHG SIP Call pending resolution ofthe instant Petition.

The EPA responded that Texas is merely forum-shopping, looking for a sympathetic court in the wake of the D.C. Circuit decision.

Stayed tuned and… Remember the Alamo!

7 Responses to “Hook ’em Horns: Texas sues EPA anew on climate”

  1. I’m pro-Texas on this one, but associating this move with UT might be a stretch. Last I looked, that University was not exactly standing up for individual freedoms against the pro-centralised-control freaks.

    All too happy to be pointed to evidence to the contrary.

  2. bobrgeologist Says:

    A thorough look at EPA’s past endangerment findings will show clearly that they are as useless as “tits on a boar” to quote a pithy old farm term. I can’t think of a better place for our Gov’t to start cutting expenses.

  3. bobrgeologist Says:

    If ever a rogue agency, such as the EPA, needed to cease and desist, this is the time. There could never be a worse time for our Government to be wasting money on a total boondoggle, the non-problem of man caused global warming. Attempts to control climate by restricting greenhouse gas (GHG)
    is liable to be counterproductive because we are still in the Pleistocene. The Holocene is actually the 5th Interglacial period of the cycle of 100,000 year glacians that have plagued our planet for the past million years. As we do not fully understand the geological processes controlling this cyclicity, I do not believe anyone can say for certain that we are done with glaciations. And with world temperature still below normal, and as long as our polar regions are iced up, we are vulnerable to another long episode of glaciation, sooner or later.

  4. iheartagw Says:

    “The EPA responded that Texas is merely forum-shopping”.

    Well, EPA cherry picked the information and sources they used for their so-called Endangerment Finding. They relied primarily on the now known extremely flawed U.N. IPCC Assessment Report which has received much criticism from real scientists. The Hockey Schtick had to be removed and the Himalayan glaciers are going to be just fine after all.

    If EPA were forced to re-visit its Endangerment Finding and subject it to open public review they KNOW they would have no chance to re-issue a positive endangerment finding.

    The new Congress must invoke the Congressional Review Act and usher Miss Lisa before House panels for every regulation she attempts to promulgate. The first question to ask her is “how realistic were EPA’s cost-to-benefit analyses for past rules?” If the American public knew the truth behind that question EPA would no longer exist as a command and control institution any longer.

  5. John Lange Says:

    I am on the staff at UT. I felt neutral about the school. I’m lovin’ it more and more now. You go horns!

  6. welder4 Says:

    All fifty eight states needs to sue the EPA and stop this abuse of power; they are not a law making body and have no authority to do what they are doing, I do not care what a communist judge said. The lady running the EPA is barely out of puberty and she wields to much power . the power is manufactured out of thin air the congress and the senate has not given it to her.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: