"The 2009 "endangerment finding" came about as a result of a prolonged legal battle that ended in a 2007 Supreme Court ruling, Massachusetts v. EPA, where it was determined that greenhouse gases qualify as pollutants under the Clean Air Act. The ruling directed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to determine whether they pose a danger to public health and welfare and it did so, based on overwhelming scientific consensus that six greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare by fueling climate change."
""We're suing to stop Trump from torching our kids' future in favor of a monster handout to oil companies," said David Pettit, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, in a statement. "Nobody but Big Oil profits from Trump trashing climate science and making cars and trucks guzzle and pollute more. Consumers will pay more to fill up, and our skies and oceans will fill up with more pollution. The EPA's rollbacks are based on political poppycock, no"
Several US environmental and health organizations filed suit in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to challenge the Trump administration's repeal of the 2009 endangerment finding. The 2009 finding followed Massachusetts v. EPA (2007) and determined that six greenhouse gases qualify as pollutants under the Clean Air Act and threaten public health and welfare. The plaintiffs argue the revocation is illegal. President Trump has dismissed human-caused climate change as a hoax and claimed repealing the finding would yield over $1 trillion in regulatory savings and loosen vehicle emissions standards. Plaintiffs include the American Lung Association, Clean Air Council, Union of Concerned Scientists, Sierra Club and Center for Biological Diversity.
Read at www.dw.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]