[ad_1]
Newou can listen to Fox News articles!
A judge on Wednesday dismissed the City of Charleston case against two dozen energy companies, saying the court has no authority to advance the case cleaning up climate change under South Carolina law.
Lamenting Judge Roger Young in Common, South Carolina, said lawsuits claiming oil and gas companies have a negative impact on the climate could open flooding in lawsuits causing weather activity, leading to a “list of potential plaintiffs.”
“Already, many states, counties and municipalities are suing a hodgepodge of oil and gas businesses over alleged weather-related impacts of climate change,” Young wrote in his opinion. “If these cases are successful, municipalities, businesses and individuals across the country may file lawsuits for injuries after all weather events. The list of potential plaintiffs is not tied up.”
The Blue State Court’s climate law could hurt U.S. energy consumers, experts said:
The judge’s decision was made on prejudice. This means that you can’t bring a lawsuit back. However, Charleston was able to appeal the decision.
The city first filed a lawsuit in 2020, with energy companies and pipelines annoying and not adequately warnings about the impact of fossil fuels on the climate. The city said the defendant should bear damage for what he said was an increase in floods, damage to the storm, increased temperatures and disruption to the ecosystem.
Environmentalists and climate advocates have filed lawsuits nationwide, imposing restrictions on fossil fuels and promoting alternative forms of energy, including the challenging emissions caused by the trucking industry. Opponents of these efforts praised Young’s decision on Thursday.
“Climate cult” when lawmakers push the Fed’s blue-state obstacles to bounce back to “US energy domination.”
Protesters hold a “No Planet B” sign next to the judge’s small giveaway. (Brian A. Jackson/South Florida Sun Sentinel; Ronen Tivony/Sopa Images/Lightrocket via Getty Images)
Christopher Mills of Spero Law, an expert in constitutional law previously written for Judge Clarence Thomas, called the firing of the case “not surprising.”
“Judge Young followed a clear consensus from courts around the country, agreeing that state tort laws are not the right path to addressing the complex issues of global climate change,” Mills said.
“It would be a shame if the city continued to lend its name to this unworthy quest by West Coast trial lawyers to steal important energy resources from Americans. In fact, as Judge Young explained, the city’s theory would be held responsible for its long-standing use.[s] To use fossil fuels for countless purposes and to build and maintain almost all roads and bridges that allow for fossil fuel-powered transport. ”
Click here to get the Fox News app
Jason Isaac, CEO of the American Energy Institute, said in a statement that the lawsuit is part of a “ESG-led” operation and is a reference to investment practices based on the political agenda.
“The courts should not be weaponized to condemn American energy producers for the global and eternal phenomenon of a changing climate,” Isaac said. “The case was part of a coordinated ESG-led campaign to shake up energy companies through litigation rather than law, and impose climate policy through litigation.
Ashley Oliver is a reporter for Fox News Digital and Fox Business, covering the Department of Justice and legal affairs. Email story tips to Ashley.oliver@fox.com.
[ad_2]Source link
