Supreme Court on Global Warming

The Supreme Court of the United States issued its opinion in Massachusetts v. EPA, today, saying, "The harms associated with climate change are serious and well recognized..."

The court took 66 pages in total, 38 for the majority. Justice Stevens delivered the 5-4 opinion. This was really a case of statutory interpretation, the court stating in pertinent part "[b]ecause greenhouse gases fit well within the Clean Air Act's capacious definition of 'air pollutant' we hold that EPA has the statutory authority to regulate the emission of such gases from new motor vehicles" (page 35-36 of pdf). However, this will ultimately be a key policy-based decision.

In dicta, the court said:

The Government’s own objective assessment of the relevant science and a strong consensus among qualified experts indicate that global warming threatens, inter alia, a precipitate rise in sea levels, severe and irreversible changes to natural ecosystems, a significant reduction in winter snowpack with direct and important economic consequences, and increases in the spread of disease and the ferocity of weather events.

I reserve my comments on this "statement" for a future post, perhaps. At this time, I chose simply to smile at the Court's use of its dicta. It will be interesting to see how this case and interwoven comments will fit into precedent for the Court to follow, and how it will impact the global warming debate.