9th Circuit Issues Rare “Correct” Ruling, Tosses Climate Change Lawsuit

9th Circuit Issues Rare “Correct” Ruling, Tosses Climate Change Lawsuit

January 23, 2020

“That lawsuit will be heard by the 9th Circuit.”

Rational Alaskans have bemoaned those words for decades, as the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has handed down numerous decisions against Alaska’s best interests, especially as they relate to responsible resource development, states’ rights, equal access to Alaska’s lands and so much more.

The recent Supreme Court decision found in John Sturgeon’s favor overturned the 9th Circuit’s original decision.  While we doubt that had a long-term impact on the Court’s liberal, anti-development tendencies, we were pleased to see them decide against eco-extremist activities last week.

In Juliana vs United States, juvenile activists sued the Federal Government, claiming that failure to change existing policy may hasten an environmental apocalypse.

The Wall Street Journal’s story on the decision by the 9th Circuit noted that both the Obama and Trump administrations had fought the case, arguing against the plaintiffs’ assertions that “alleged the government knew for decades that carbon-dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels were producing dangerous changes to the climate but nevertheless continued to adopt energy policies that made the problem worse.

Citing the looming potential impact of a warming planet, the young people argued the government was violating their right to life, liberty and property, and they claimed a right to “a stable climate system capable of sustaining human lives.”

For Americans burdened by many of the 9th Circuit’s previous decisions, this correct ruling against feelings-over-facts-based plaintiffs is good news.  Let’s hope that courts begin to make these types of rulings the norm, rather than the exception.  American jobs, energy independence and energy dominance can’t happen if worthless, juvenile lawsuits are given credibility.