By abandoning their strict states'-rights principles for a broad view of the EPA's authority, conservatives have boxed themselves into a corner. If Congress and the White House are in a more environmental mood after November, conservative anti-environmentalists may find that they have laid the legal groundwork for their ultimate defeat. Full Story »
Posted by Kaizar Campwala
The article captures the legal logical inconsistency of neo-con attempts to use the legal system any way that suits their concepts of short term profit at the cost of the biosphere. The author seems to exude the scent of the right wing destructionists in suggesting that the public mood is shifting to protect the environment. The public mood has always been such; the problem is the right rich radical reactionaries who took over the formerly respectable Republican party flew in the face of public opinion in order to protect the plundering of the commons by their corporate core constituency. One has to work a bit to bring this article to the common ground that there is a need to restore the rule of law of, by and for the people. ... More »
This is an analysis of how conservatives have tried to restrain the power of states and the EPA to regulate the environment. It's a serious piece, as one would expect from the New Republic. It's interesting, but I don't know how important the analysis ultimately is.
Informative perspective about how the conservative legal war against the environment may have backfired. This news analysis presents detailed, factual evidence to track a series of legal actions, suggesting that the Supreme Court may now defer more to Congress on environmental issues, and that Congress may be more likely to support pro-environmental causes, particularly if a democrat gets elected as president. Well researched, reasonable argument.
Retrieving Comments
