Allowing Carbon Emissions Is Revealed to Be Unconstitutional

Maybe the Constitution is as bad as progressives say. Literally all human activity produces CO2; the more productive the activity, the more CO2 it will probably produce, which is fortunate for the plants it nourishes. However, now we learn that failing to punish the production of CO2 is unconstitutional:

The current unwillingness or inability of Congress to deal systematically with the problem of climate change threatens both the world’s climate—which nearly everyone has noticed—and the United States Constitution–which has gone virtually unnoticed.

The discredited theory that CO2 has a deleterious effect on the climate is assumed as fact, despite the failure of temperatures to rise in correlation with CO2 levels.

Here’s how the Constitution comes into it:

Trending: The 15 Best Conservative News Sites On The Internet

The longer Congress takes to form the necessary bipartisan coalition to legislate on the subject, the more tempting it becomes for people who are alarmed at the world’s problem, to look to other branches of the government to rescue the Earth.

For example, if Congress would just do what he wants, Obama wouldn’t have to weaken the Constitution by ruling by decree:

Obama’s executive action to use the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate coal-burning power plants is meeting serious opposition from the attorneys general of several states on grounds of legality and constitutionality.

Already, Peabody Energy has procured the services of Harvard Law School’s famous constitutional lawyer Lawrence Tribe to assert its interests in a federal court and thus challenge the imperial reach of our modern presidency.

There have also been tyrannical attempts to use courts to limit the amount of harmless carbon we produce.

So if you don’t want Obama and leftist courts indulging in authoritarianism, encourage Congress to rubberstamp their pernicious demands. Neither the climate nor the Constitution will thank you, but moonbats will.

As if to enlighten those who still haven’t realized that when they talk about “climate change” they are talking about socialism, author Mark E. Neely Jr. makes a disclosure:

I am a member of the State College chapter of the Citizens’ Climate Lobby, which works ceaselessly and patiently for legislation in Congress to put a reasonable fee on the production of carbon at the source and to pass along to the American People, in equal shares for every person, the revenues thus derived.

He wants Congress to impose this repressive form of collectivist egalitarianism in the name of the Constitution.

quote-why-has-it-seemed-that-the-only-way-to-protect-the-environment-is-with-heavy-handed-government-gale-norton
Answer: Because heavy-handed regulation is not a means but an end.

On a tip from heckrules. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!