climate zombies. It also appears that a majority of the Supreme Court is skeptical about the existence of global warming.
The American Constitution Society reported on a U.S. Supreme Court decision which blocked a lawsuit "aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, holding that because the power to regulate emissions had been delegated to the Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Air Act, federal common law did not apply." ACS discussed some positive aspects of the opinion as well as more problematic ones.
Most disturbing is the "opinion’s overt skepticism about the science of climate change, which likely influenced their decision in this case." Yale professor Douglas Kysar dissects the opinion, which suggests readers explore “views opposing the EPA” by reading a profile of Freeman Dyson, “the theoretical physicist whose controversial views on climate change have been widely promoted by the climate-skeptic community.”
Kysar also points out how "the court also repeated a prominent sceptical refrain about the ubiquity and supposed banality of greenhouse-gas emissions — 'after all, we each emit carbon dioxide merely by breathing' — that serves only to downplay the severity and significance of industrial emissions.'"
As Kysar concludes: "That the nation's highest court would repeat this misleading refrain, and seemingly endorse Dyson's views as equal to those of the IPCC and the EPA, simply takes the breath away."