Chevron has fallen!

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by Pieces of Malarkey, Jun 28, 2024.

  1. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,844
    Likes Received:
    2,749
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So much for CO2 as a regulated pollutant.

    And mandated EVs.
     
    AFM, Lil Mike, GrayMan and 1 other person like this.
  2. Jack Hays

    Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    34,219
    Likes Received:
    22,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  3. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    32,720
    Likes Received:
    30,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A remarkable day for the rights and liberties of our nation and its citizens. Next will be the Obstruction BS. Oh wait, the decision is in, and once again, liberal tyranny has been overturned..
     
    AFM, ptif219, Jack Hays and 2 others like this.
  4. Jack Hays

    Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    34,219
    Likes Received:
    22,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  5. Pro_Line_FL

    Pro_Line_FL Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2018
    Messages:
    32,367
    Likes Received:
    18,528
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Meaning?
     
  6. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,844
    Likes Received:
    2,749
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The logic of Chevron undergirded Massachusetts v. EPA in 2007 which allowed the the Obama administration to declare CO2 a pollutant that can be regulated by the EPA.

    Which in turn has allowed the recently revised CO2 regulations to force about 60% of new cars sold in 2032 to be EVs, on the way to 100% in 2035.

    Now that Chevron has fallen, either Massachusetts falls too or a number of groups in the last month have filed suit to formally kill Massachusetts once and for all.

    The EV mandate, and likely the EV industry, are dead meat now that the government can't force it.

    Hope you're not heavily in to Tesla stock. If you are, sell now.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2024
    AFM and drluggit like this.
  7. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    32,720
    Likes Received:
    30,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Looks like its shaping up to be an epic day for the citizens of the US.

     
    Pieces of Malarkey likes this.
  8. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,844
    Likes Received:
    2,749
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Like many leftists these days, these folks don't understand that Biden's "climate bill" wasn't legislation. It was a spending bill. The difference is important.

    Spending bills, thanks to Harry Reid, don't need a supermajority in the Senate to pass. Actual legislation still does.

    To maintain EPA's authority to regulate CO2, the Clean Air Act, actual legislation, would need to be amended. Which climate zealots will never be able to do.

    The government may be able to continue to offer bribes to buy EVs, but they won't be able to mandate them.

    Just thought I'd clear that up.
     
    FatBack, Sunsettommy and Jack Hays like this.
  9. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,844
    Likes Received:
    2,749
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh, and just for fun, EVs are only the most prominent example of climate stupidity.

    Today's decision also kills the whole power plants can't run on fossil fuels crap.

    Now maybe we can get back to worrying about reliability in the power grid as a primary goal of operators.

    And suddenly windmills killing whales isn't as attractive.
     
    roorooroo and Jack Hays like this.
  10. Pro_Line_FL

    Pro_Line_FL Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2018
    Messages:
    32,367
    Likes Received:
    18,528
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    EVs aren't all about the climate, - people like them because they save money on gas (saves about 60% in fuel costs).

    So, going forward I suppose a judge in a court can declare what is and isn't considered a pollutant regardless of scientific consensus.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2024
    Media_Truth likes this.
  11. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,844
    Likes Received:
    2,749
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No, not at all. You've got it backwards.

    If you want something to be a regulated pollutant, Congress needs to put that in authorizing legislation.

    Whatever scientific concensus you believe is real concerning CO2, still have to amend the CAA. Or pass other legislation.
     
    Lil Mike likes this.
  12. Media_Truth

    Media_Truth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2016
    Messages:
    8,604
    Likes Received:
    2,833
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This will have no impact. The technology of EVs and renewable power, with EVs representing massive battery storage of power, during peak renewable production, is simply far superior in efficiency and sustainability.
     
  13. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,844
    Likes Received:
    2,749
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Keep dreaming.

    Someday you might get there.
     
    FatBack and Jack Hays like this.
  14. Pro_Line_FL

    Pro_Line_FL Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2018
    Messages:
    32,367
    Likes Received:
    18,528
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, because.....politicians know better than anyone. Right? LOL

    We see new "bath salts", - synthetic meth. being sold at gas stations, because all the manufacturers have to do it alter the formula a one tiny bit to get around the regulation, and now it takes an act of Congress to keep up with it.

    Like I said, there are some good things in it, and there will be plenty of unintended consequences.

    I didn't say anything about CO2.

    I am just saying that US will be incredibly slow to react even when fast reaction is needed.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2024
  15. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,844
    Likes Received:
    2,749
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Huh?
     
  16. Shutcie

    Shutcie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2021
    Messages:
    5,367
    Likes Received:
    4,536
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, but all of the regulations brandon instructed government agencies to write as part of his green initiative are now up for grabs.
    You know, gotta buy an EV before 2035.
    The gas stove thingy.
    The air conditioning thingy.

    All up for grabs.
     
    FatBack and Jack Hays like this.
  17. Media_Truth

    Media_Truth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2016
    Messages:
    8,604
    Likes Received:
    2,833
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I’m not thinkying much about thingys
     
    Bowerbird likes this.
  18. Shutcie

    Shutcie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2021
    Messages:
    5,367
    Likes Received:
    4,536
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Biden doesn't think about much else.
     
  19. Media_Truth

    Media_Truth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2016
    Messages:
    8,604
    Likes Received:
    2,833
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wasn’t it Trump who said he likes to grab women by their thingys?
     
  20. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,844
    Likes Received:
    2,749
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, they are. EPA was at the center of both Chevron v. NRDC and Massachusetts v. EPA. This decision has EPA and all those dippy things right in the crosshairs.

    And it should be noted that EPA was the defendant in Massachusetts. EPA began by arguing that they didn't have the authority to regulate CO2. Chevron may not automatically cause Massachusetts to fall, but oil companies, light and heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers, and about a half dozen others have filed suits against the EPA for just such an occurrence and they've got EPA's losing arguments to crib off of. It's bound to be a bloodbath. Gas stoves, incandescent lights, air conditioning- all kinds of things the global warming idiots want to ban- now can't be.

    And it also means the US can't meet their Paris Accord commitments. The smart money would be on that being the beginning of the end of that whole fraud, and maybe the IPCC with it once other countries figure out, we ain't doing squat.

    And in the last decade or so Tesla has made an easy $9 billion from ICE competitors just for existing under the EPA's regulatory cap and trade scheme. Now I guess they've got to try to make a profit off their own product. Sucks to be them.

    And that's only the beginning. The logical flaws in the CAA that allowed EPA to regulate CO2 work the same way for other real pollutants. Looks like EPA may not have much to do in the near future.

    And in the end, Chevron's the most cited decision in SC history. About 70 times. Goes way beyond just EPA.

    RIP the Deep State.
     
    Shutcie likes this.
  21. ptif219

    ptif219 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2011
    Messages:
    10,677
    Likes Received:
    665
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is great news
     
    Pieces of Malarkey and Jack Hays like this.
  22. ptif219

    ptif219 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2011
    Messages:
    10,677
    Likes Received:
    665
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Jack Hays likes this.
  23. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    12,683
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The idea is so crazy, I can't believe even Democrats would support it.

    Democrats in California, probably yes, but not Democrats across the rest of the U.S.

    I have to believe it was a calculated move, knowing the Supreme Court would shoot it down, and then it would just make conservative judges look even worse in the eyes of hardcore progressive voters (only helping to push the narrative that "something needs to be done" to curb the power of the Supreme Court now that it has a slight conservative majority). So they can blame the court for it falling through, and meanwhile be able to claim that they tried, so will be "off the hook" from the environmental activists who are one wing of the Democrat party that they count on and try to placate.

    Either that or Biden really is so incompetent he doesn't know what's going on or have any sense of what this law would do, and is surrounding himself with some pretty extreme progressive advisors, who are guiding the policies of his administration.
     
  24. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,844
    Likes Received:
    2,749
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The key is it's not up to Democrats. It's irrelevant what they think.

    Unless they want to override it by amending the CAA to include CO2.

    But the odds they can get 60 votes in the Senate, that's dead in the water.

    Check and Mate.
     
  25. Jack Hays

    Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    34,219
    Likes Received:
    22,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    "It's dead, Jim."

    The End Of "Chevron" Deference

    June 28, 2024/ Francis Menton

    • The rush of end-of-term decisions from the Supreme Court, not to mention last night’s presidential debate, gives me many more potential topics to write about than I could ever get to.

    • How to choose? On the subject of the presidential debate, I doubt that I have anything to say that a hundred others have not said in the past 24 hours. So then, which of the latest crop of Supreme Court decisions is the most important?

    • On that last question, my vote goes to Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. This is the case that has rather emphatically overruled the 1984 case of Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council.
    READ MORE
     
    Pieces of Malarkey likes this.

Share This Page