Court caps climate alarmism

Thankfully, the Montana Supreme Court has washed its hands of a silly petition that sought to compel the state of Montana to declare the atmosphere a “public trust” requiring protection by “establishing and enforcing limitations on the level of greenhouse gas emissions as necessary to mitigate human caused climate change.”

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of a group of Montana children and their parents at the behest of an Oregon-based organization called Our Children’s Trust. The group has pursued similar administrative or legal actions across the country, hoping that some court somewhere will be willing to allow an end-run for regulations that Congress and state legislatures have refused to provide for good reasons.

It is astoundingly arrogant for the plaintiffs in this case to assume that the Earth’s atmosphere can be manhandled and manipulated through taxes and regulations. They claimed that the need to so is so urgent that it required prompt reaction from the state Supreme Court.

But the court didn’t bite. It instead ruled that such a case would require a resolution of the factual assertions in the case; in other words it would require the disputed realm of climate science to be put on trial.

No doubt, the climate has long been changing, and maybe humankind has had an effect on it, but the cost-benefit disparity involved with cap-and-tax policies is staggering — guaranteed economic consequences to purchase a speculative, tiny impact on the climate in the long term.

China, India and other developing countries don’t give a rip if Montana is forced to adopt economy strangling policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Those countries aren’t about to curb their emissions, making it entirely unlikely that a compelled effort in Montana to do so will make even the slightest dent in global emissions.

Heck, a single volcanic eruption could wipe out any gains made from extreme sacrifices in Montana. And make no mistake, the proposition of capping and taxing energy production and consumption would be extremely costly.

Our position is that strong, advanced economies have been and will continue to be the best resource for curbing pollution and protecting the environment. Why Our Children’s Trust doesn’t recognize that is perplexing.

Or maybe it’s not, considering that climate alarmism has become a shakedown racket that has spawned scores of well-funded organizations like Our Children’s Trust.

Their modus operandi is to keep climate change fear alive in order to keep the money rolling in, and to continue pressing the matter on a variety of fronts, including litigation. In this case, the matter may be gone for now, but apparently it will return to Montana’s legal system in a lower court.

“Unfortunately, this [decision] exposes the state to protracted and costly litigation, which the court will have to rule on anyway at the end of the day,” said Amy Eddy of Kalispell, one of the plaintiff attorneys.

Well, hopefully it will be costly for the plaintiffs, because the state of Montana should vigorously resist being compelled to adopt costly, futile policies sought by litigious environmental groups.