The Supreme Court kicks off a new term with a case ostensibly about climate change but with much bigger stakes. The real issue is whether states and localities can turn federalism on its head to dictate policy for the rest of the country.
Boulder and more than 30 other state and local governments have sued oil and gas producers for alleged damage caused by global CO2 emissions. The Colorado Supreme Court ruled Boulder’s state claims aren’t pre-empted by federal law, creating a semantic distinction without a difference.
Under the Colorado court’s ruling, oil and gas companies would have no choice but to cease producing fossil fuels to avoid enormous liability. Letting a state dictate U.S. climate policy would turn the Constitution’s proper understanding of federalism upside down.
The Supreme Court said in 1996: “No single State” can impose “a policy for the entire Nation.” Tolerating Boulder’s raid would blow the Constitution’s doors open to similar laws in New York and Vermont, and intrude on foreign policy powers vested in Congress and the President.
Source: Wall Street Journal US Business · Summarized by HeadlinesBriefing