A better idea would be for them to live the net zero life they demand for Everyone Else, and convince all their climate cult friends to do the same
Judge dismisses California kids’ climate lawsuit. They plan to try again
After a federal judge dismissed a landmark climate lawsuit filed by 18 California children against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the youth plaintiffs plan to amend and resubmit their allegations, their attorneys say.
The children — who have lost homes in wildfires, suffered health problems from breathing polluted air, missed weeks of education due to climate change-related school closures and been forced to ration tap water due to unprecedented droughts — sued the EPA for allegedly violating their constitutional rights by allowing pollution from burning fossil fuels to continue despite knowing the harm it poses to kids.
Except, the EPA is not a dictatorial federal agency, and doesn’t have the statutory authority to act as one. CO2 is not a pollutant.
Judge Michael Fitzgerald of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California this month ruled the plaintiffs lacked legal standing to bring the suit because they did not show how the remedies they sought — including a declaratory judgment that their constitutional rights have been violated — would mitigate those harms.
“Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate how a declaration regarding Plaintiffs’ rights under the Constitution and the legality of Defendants’ conduct, on its own, is likely to remedy these alleged injuries,” he wrote. The ruling granted the plaintiffs permission to amend their complaint by no later than May 20.
Too bad Judge Fitzgerald didn’t ask the kiddies if they were practicing what they preached, and if they were traveling around in fossil fueled vehicles.
The co-executive director of Our Children’s Trust, an Oregon-based nonprofit law firm that represents the plaintiffs and has filed similar suits in other states, called the order unjust and said attorneys would be filing an amended complaint.
“When presented with a constitutional violation, there is no reason for a federal judge to throw up his hands and say nothing can be done,” Mat dos Santos, general counsel of Our Children’s Trust, said in a statement. “In doing just that, this order tells children that judges have no power to hear their complaints. Courts do, in fact, have that power.”
They keep saying “constitutional”, but, they never actually point to the part of the constitution, other than a vague notion
The children who filed Genesis v. EPA are asking the federal court to hear and weigh their evidence, then ultimately issue a declaratory judgment that the EPA has violated their fundamental constitutional rights to equal protection of the law and their fundamental rights to life.
The filed suit doesn’t actually explain how this violates “equal protection of the law”. And there is no fundamental right to life (which is interesting, because the same people astroturfing these suits surely believe in abortion on demand). They further assert that they have a fundamental right to a life-sustaining climate. They seriously try to cite things like Article II, but, it gets pretty squishy and more along the lines of “The EPA must Do Something because we say so!”
Read: Climate Kiddies Plan To Try And Sue In California Again »