A True Progressive Top Court Takes On Climate Change: The Case Of Germany

A True Progressive Top Court Takes On Climate Change:  The Case Of Germany
  • Two of my recent posts have looked at critiques from the left of the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. EPA — the June 30 decision that held that the Clean Air Act did not clearly give EPA authority to order the phase-out of all fossil-fuel generated electricity in the U.S.

  • My July 5 post, “How To Think Like A Liberal Supreme Court Justice,” summarized Justice Elena Kagan’s dissent in the West Virginia case. My September 12 post, “How The Left Views Administrative Law,” discussed the presentation at the Federalist Society convention by Professor Sally Katzen of NYU Law School, where she stated her belief that EPA did have the authority in question, and criticized the Court for having taken “an extreme action to shut down rule-making.”

  • But the Kagan dissent and Katzen presentation are just critiques of the approach to this matter taken by our constitutionalist-dominated Supreme Court. A separate question is, what would the liberals do if they suddenly found themselves in control of the top court — say, if a new Democrat-controlled Congress decides to create six new justices to be appointed by President Biden?

  • At the lunch following the panel where Professor Katzen spoke, I found myself sitting next to two lawyers who had come from Germany to attend the convention. One of them said to me, in essence, you have no idea what a country’s top court might do when it feels that its powers are unconstrained.

Read More

How The Left Views Administrative Law: A Highlight From The Federalist Society Convention

  • You may have seen that the Federalist Society has been holding its annual convention in Washington. I was there on Thursday and Friday. They have recorded all the presentations. If you want to watch some, go to this link and see what interests you.

  • There was not a lot of moaning about the election results. Rather, the focus was on high-minded issues, mostly of constitutional and administrative law.

  • I have selected a highlight that you may find interesting. One of the lunchtime panels on Thursday was titled “Render Law Unto Congress and Execution Unto the Executive: The Supreme Court Rebalances Constitutional Power.” Here is the description of the subject of the panel:

  • The Roberts Court is recasting the administrative state according to its view of the separation of powers. It is giving the President more authority to fire his subordinates and creating a hierarchical executive where the President and his principal officers have more authority over appointments and decision making.

Read More

New Yorkers: If You Re-elect These Idiots, It's On You

  • Today is Election Day. At the federal level, all seats in the House of Representatives and one third of the Senate are up for election.

  • Also up for election here in New York, as in most of the states, are all state-wide elective offices, as well as all seats in both houses of the State Legislature. Currently the Democrats hold all of the state-wide elective offices (Governor/Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, and Comptroller), as well as super-majorities in both houses of the Legislature (106 of 150 seats in the Assembly and 43 of 63 seats in the State Senate).

  • Of the New York races, the only one that has been subject to extensive public polling is the race for Governor.

Read More

Understanding Biden Administration Energy Policy

  • Politicians have long been known for having a loose relationship with the truth. Generally, that takes the form of exaggeration or hyperbole. But the latest craze among Democrats is just making flatly contradictory statements.

  • In this category, it’s hard to top the performance of Pennsylvania Senate candidate John Fetterman on Saturday night, when he uttered this immortal quote:

  • I run on Roe v Wade. I celebrate the demise of Roe v. Wade. That's the choice that we have between us, in front of us.”

  • Video at the link if you don’t believe it. Clearly, Fetterman is not all there mentally.

  • But how different is that, really, from Joe Biden on energy policy?

Read More

Some Thoughts On Affirmative Action

  • The Supreme Court arguments in the Harvard and University of North Carolina affirmative action cases took place on Monday. I listened to some substantial portion, although it was not possible for me to listen to the whole thing (some 5 hours in total). From what I heard, I agree with most commenters that affirmative action in the form currently practiced throughout academia is not likely to survive.

  • Affirmative action is one of those issues on which the opinions of our intellectual elites diverge almost completely from the opinions of normal people.

  • In a piece on Tuesday (November 1) discussing the likely outcome of the Harvard/UNC case, the New York Times took note of the broad public opposition to affirmative action in college admissions, even extending to heavily Democratic constituencies:

Read More

UK Trapped In The Green Energy Cul-de-Sac

UK Trapped In The Green Energy Cul-de-Sac
  • Often I have referred to the situation that the UK, Germany, California and others have set themselves up for as “hitting the green energy wall.”

  • But now that the UK has actually gotten there and has begun to deal with the consequences, I’m not sure that “hitting the wall” is the best analogy. A better analogy might be “driving into the green energy cul-de-sac.”

  • After all, when you hit a wall you can probably just pick yourself up and turn around and be on your way. In the cul-de-sac you are trapped with no evident way of getting out. You might be in there for a long time.

  • This is where the UK finds itself today.

Read More