The Corner

The one and only.

Another Rebuff For The Co2 Alarmists


Some of our favorite attoneys general sued the EPA this year over the agency’s claim that it had no authority to regulate carbon dioxide (which is a natural and vital part of the atmosphere) as a pollutant. The case was important as if EPA did so regulate, it would be a huge brake on the nation’s economy. The case was rejected earlier in the year, but a dissent from Judge Tatel gave the plaintiffs room to call for an en banc rehearing. Today, the D.C. Circuit has denied rehearing en banc of its decision (Massachusetts v. E.P.A., Dec. 2, 2005).

A majority of the D.C. Circuit judges voted not to rehear the case. Judges Tatel, Rogers, and Griffith voted to rehear the case en banc. Judges Tatel and Rogers argued that the earlier ruling that the EPA does not have to regulate greenhouse gases was wrong. Judge Griffith did not express an opinion on the earlier ruling’s correctness, only voting that the case should be reheard.


Sign up for free NR e-mails today:

Subscribe to National Review