Siding with four teenage plaintiffs and the environmental groups that backed them, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on Tuesday ruled that the state has failed to fulfill its legal obligation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Young people with more vision, integrity and leadership than the current occupant of the WH............
Kids, You.ve been suckered. You've been lulled into thinking small. Even 100% reductions (by any time over a decade from now) will NOT save your future from what's already comin' at us. I am not kidding, so laugh if you will, This kumbaya press release of the Massachusetts Supreme Court reversal of a lower court ruling is an appeasement by the .01% of wealthy Americans.
A cruel system, "rigged and corrupted", as Senator Sanders says. Sorry, I love all of you and wish the best. Vote Sanders. Stay with his Progressive, ant-corporate agenda, through the next years and decades coming. Then and only then will you and the world of other young people have a fighting chance, as an emerging WORLD FAMILY WORKING TOGETHER, of reigning in this fossil-fuel climate beast - caused by the bankster-class and their myopic greed!
Don't accept another single nuclear powerplant - at our certain peril of thousands of years of cell-mutating radionuclide contaminations from everyday operation, as well as "routine" still fissioning, so-called "spent fuel" that must be watched for centuries! $Trillions$ in future costs of treasure and preventable suffering. Hippy geezer, over and out!
Bravo to the kids who brought this court action. Deliberate harming of the environment is a war crime against the future, and those whom perpetrate or shill for it deserve prison at the minimum.
There are times when the USA manages to impress me. This is one of them. In terms of the developed nations' approach to anthropogenic global heating, this must be a world-first occasion.
"this decision will certainly be challenged in USSC."
I think this is not necessariiy so. This looks to be a state issue and has been decided by the hightest court in that state. To be appealed to the US Supreme court, there has to be a federal basis for jurisdiction one that
"involves a point of constitutional and/or federal law."
(For those who want more on the jurisdictional requirement, they may be found at uscourts.gov)
I think that point of law will be found in the fifth amendment takings clause; corporations must be compensated for property value lost (e.g. future profits) when regulations are established to protect homeowners or communities, and perhaps in the commerce clauses.
This is why overturning Citizens United is not the cure to what ails us. Corporations have more than first amendment rights and won't be satisfied until they become the government, which they have nearly achieved. If we're going to overturn Citizens United, it requires a Constitutional amendment. If we're going to amend the Constitution, then shouldn't we actually attempt to fix a structural problem within the document by defining who people are and who has inherent human rights?
Way to go kids!
Hopefully adults will notice and emulate your mature, intelligent behaviour.
Ahh adults, always screwing things up!
To the Young leading the way.
Don't listen the the OLD smudgecrummins on this page, they have lost their "Student Mind"
When all those around you said it couldn't be done and means nothing,
you kept faith in your own Honesty.
Stay the course, you are Humanity's Strength and Vision.
Bravo for you, Job well Done !!!
Now on to the next task.