2008 Woodie Awards
Home > News
Forum celebrates Supreme Court's EPA ruling
The decision says the EPA must regulate carbon dioxide and other polluting greenhouse gases
by Linda Gerstenberger | Freelance reporter |
In a sharp rebuke to the Bush administration, the Supreme Court ruled on April 2 that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the responsibility to regulate greenhouse gases. In a forum, students and professors at the University School of Law celebrated this decision because even though the decision isn't likely to stop global warming, they said, the government is finally recognizing that global warming is really happening.
"The debate over global warming is finished," said University law student Morgan Dethman in the forum's opening statements.
The suit, the first global warming case ever to be heard before the Court, was brought against the EPA by the State of Massachusetts and 11 other states including Oregon. In its decision, the Court ruled against the EPA, deciding that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are pollutants and that it is the responsibility of the EPA to regulate them under the Clean Air Act Extension of 1970.
"This was a huge decision," said law student Alyssa Johl.
"Before, it was always argued that there wasn't enough science (to rule on global warming)," added law student Amber Munger, "but in this decision they are saying that actually there is."
Dethman, Johl and Munger are members of the Environmental and Natural Resources Law Program and their group, along with the International Law Society, organized the forum to analyze the significance of the decision. The forum included presentations from four University law professors and attracted about 70 students and community members.
Panelist and law professor Mary Wood agreed with the students, saying that one of the decision's victories is the recognition of global warming by one branch of the government.
"The Supreme Court said global warming is real," she said.
Wood, who is an expert on claims brought by states and Native American tribes against the federal government for failure to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, called the decision "a great victory for the states," because it affirmed that the states have the right to bring these lawsuits.
"The debate over global warming is finished," said University law student Morgan Dethman in the forum's opening statements.
The suit, the first global warming case ever to be heard before the Court, was brought against the EPA by the State of Massachusetts and 11 other states including Oregon. In its decision, the Court ruled against the EPA, deciding that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are pollutants and that it is the responsibility of the EPA to regulate them under the Clean Air Act Extension of 1970.
"This was a huge decision," said law student Alyssa Johl.
"Before, it was always argued that there wasn't enough science (to rule on global warming)," added law student Amber Munger, "but in this decision they are saying that actually there is."
Dethman, Johl and Munger are members of the Environmental and Natural Resources Law Program and their group, along with the International Law Society, organized the forum to analyze the significance of the decision. The forum included presentations from four University law professors and attracted about 70 students and community members.
Panelist and law professor Mary Wood agreed with the students, saying that one of the decision's victories is the recognition of global warming by one branch of the government.
"The Supreme Court said global warming is real," she said.
Wood, who is an expert on claims brought by states and Native American tribes against the federal government for failure to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, called the decision "a great victory for the states," because it affirmed that the states have the right to bring these lawsuits.
Be the first to comment on this story