Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Christian and Theologically Protestant? Or, sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Fenced Community

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible-believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non-Nicene, non-Biblical heresy.
Register now

Christian Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Sign in to follow this  
News Feeder

Ninth Circuit Finally Hands Trump A Win Against Youth’s Global Warming Lawsuit

Recommended Posts

By Michael Bastasch -

9th-circuit-court-250x205.jpg

http://dailycaller.com/

The Trump administration’s battle against a global warming lawsuit brought by 21 youths will continue into 2019 after a federal court handed the government a big win over the holiday season.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the Justice Department (DOJ) in a December 26 ruling largely missed by major media outlets. The court granted DOJ’s petition for interlocutory appeal that allows the government to fight the lawsuit without going to trial in a district court.

The three-judge Ninth Circuit panel is the very same that in March 2018 ruled against Trump administration petitions for a writ of mandamus, which allows a higher court to overrule a lower court before a case is decided.

Environmentalists handling the case on behalf of youth activists immediately filed a petition asking the District Court of Oregon to clarify how the trial will proceed.

“The bottom line is, this case is ready for trial, and should not be held up by further appeals,” Julia Olson, chief legal counsel and executive director of Our Children’s Trust, the activist group handling the climate lawsuit.

“The government has used the power of their office and the depth of taxpayer coffers to waste precious time and resources to avoid trial in this case, and now the court has capitulated with little scrutiny,” Olson said in a statement.

Our Children’s Trust filed suit against the federal government in 2015 on behalf of 21 youths, aged 11 to 22, arguing their right to a “stable climate system” was being violated. The suit asks the court to order the government to issue laws and regulations to fight global warming.

The government should move “to ensure that atmospheric CO2 is no more concentrated than 350 [parts per million] by 2100 … to stabilize the climate system,” reads the group’s legal complaint.

The youth lawsuit is just one of a handful of global warming lawsuits being brought before state and federal courts in recent years as environmentalists, Democratic politicians and trial lawyers turn to the courts to advance the climate agenda.

Youth activists, however, base their legal reasoning on the idea that the “public trust doctrine” also requires the government to ensure a “stable climate system.” Many legal experts are doubtful that activists will succeed in getting the courts to force other branches of government to push climate policies.

The U.S. District Court in Oregon ruled in 2016 the youth plaintiffs had standing to sue, which was reaffirmed by the Ninth Circuit in March.

In November 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the youths’ climate lawsuit could proceed after initially granting the Trump administration’s request to stay the climate lawsuit.

However, the Supreme Court’s unsigned opinion also stated the reasons the Ninth Circuit rejected the Trump administration’s petition for mandamus relief were “to a large extent, no longer pertinent.”

Ninth Circuit Appeals Judge Michelle Friedland claims in her four-page dissent the lower court only approved the Trump administration’s appeal is because it “felt compelled” to by the Supreme Court’s November opinion.

“We could then resolve any novel legal questions if and when they are presented to us after final judgment,” Friedlander wrote in her dissent, which argues the climate lawsuit should go to trial.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected]

Ninth Circuit Finally Hands Trump A Win Against Youth’s Global Warming Lawsuit is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust - Conservative News Website for U.S. News, Political Cartoons and more.

View the original full article

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Topics

    • I ‘Left’ the Global Poor to Serve the Global Poor

      I went to graduate school to help the poor. I wanted to study economic development—to determine what causes poverty among the global poor and what can be done about it. More than any other field within economics, development seems to exist for the sole purpose of making the world a better place for those most in need. But after my first year of graduate school, I became a macroeconomist. Rather than study the forces directly affecting the poorest of the poor, I now study abstractions like the global financial system. The main actors in my research are not the global poor, but the global wealthy—bankers and financiers investing unimaginable sums of money, with no consideration at all for how their money-slushing affects farmers in Malawi. When I told one of my professors I wanted to study macro, he sharply told me, “How are you ever going to help anybody?” Then he turned and literally walked away. He was an expert in poverty intervention; I would become an expert in Wall Street intervention. In his eyes, and perhaps in the eyes of many Christians, I had sold out. Meanwhile, back in 2008, the once-obscure market for American subprime mortgages took down the global financial system, leading to a collapse in global economic activity unseen since the Great Depression. The financial crisis had U.S. roots, and yet it shook the whole world. Developing economies lost about 8.5 percent of income growth. That meant that farmers in Malawi and Mongolia and all over the developing world were on average 8.5 percent poorer than they would have been had the global financial system not collapsed. If not for the U.S. crisis, the economy of Madagascar would likely have grown by 7 percent, but instead it shrank almost 5 percent; in Madagascar, bank losses on American mortgages took away 12 percent of the incomes of 20 million people. To serve the poor, we need experts in poverty intervention like my professor. But that’s not all we need. If the U.S. financial system can be made slightly more stable by limiting some forms of risk-taking—well, no farmers in Malawi will ever notice directly. But well-designed and effective macro and financial policies mean the whole world will be better off. To answer my professor, good macro policies will help everybody. Including the global poor. Maybe even especially. Not Beyond Reach It’s not easy. Mitigating catastrophes is hard. Preventing financial crises is probably impossible. Policies to stabilize the global financial system and the global economy are tricky to get right. But much is at stake. Especially because sometimes good macro policies are not beyond our reach. Sometimes we know exactly which policies will help and which will lead to a state of chaos and fear. My dad emigrated from Venezuela when he was young. Venezuela is now one of the most unstable countries in the world. Poverty rates exceed 76 percent. The economy is about 40 percent smaller than it was three years ago. Inflation has reached 80,000 percent per year—which is an almost meaningless number—what do prices even mean at that rate? While the full story of the Venezuelan economy is complex, the outcome was perfectly predictable and avoidable. Venezuela became increasingly—and unnecessarily—dependent on oil revenue to finance government spending. Oil prices collapsed. The government printed unending amounts of money to finance its spending. The currency’s value collapsed, and prices skyrocketed. The government imposed price controls, which led to shortages of basic necessities like food, water, and diapers. Black markets flourished, and official markets seized up. Now only the richest of the rich can afford food and medicine. This was an avoidable crisis for 30 million people. No amount of poverty intervention strategies would have stopped it. But good macro policy would have. Renewal at Multiple Levels When Israel returned from exile, it needed both micro interventions and macro institutions. The people needed Ezra to call them to personal holiness, Nehemiah to organize economic activity, and Esther to establish macro-level policies that would allow Israel to do those things without getting slaughtered. Rebuilding Jerusalem required spiritual, economic, and political renewal at multiple levels. Like Israel, Venezuela needs multi-pronged renewal. They need disaster relief. They need private enterprise. They need health services and distribution networks for food. They need churches to provide material and spiritual care for the people. And they need better high-level institutions. But if they get those things without a responsible economic policy, they’ll be back in the same dilemma. Economic policy matters. For the care of the poor, for the providing of jobs, for the development of the earth, for the advancing of God’s kingdom—economic policy matters. As Christians, we should all be grateful for my professor, whose life’s work is understanding the on-the-ground minutia of poverty. We should also be grateful for good policy at high levels. That’s another way that Christians can go and do likewise. View the full article

      in Christian Current Events

    • ‘Save The Dreamers’: WaPo Implores Pelosi To Take Trump’s Wall Deal

      By Chris White - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and congressional Democrats are losing one big voice in their opposition to President Donald Trump’s push for a border wall: The Washington Post’s Editorial Board. WaPo noted in a Sunday editorial reasons why Pelosi should rebuke the president’s most recent offer to temporarily extend protections for the so-called Dreamers. But the paper eventually explained that taking the deal would ultimately help those who came here through the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. “He should not be rewarded for having taken the government hostage. Any piece of a wall would reinforce his hateful, anti-immigrant rhetoric,” WaPo noted. “He’s unreliable, having made and withdrawn similar offers in the past.” WaPo’s editorial board has blasted Trump in the past for what its writers call pushing immigration policies that would “cripple the economy.” It’s taking a different approach now. Sunday’s editorial explains why young people who came to the U.S. through the Obama-era program are in peril of being deported. If nothing happens soon, then the Dreamers could get the short end of the stick, WaPo noted. “If no deal is reached, the Supreme Court is likely at some point to end that dispensation, as Mr. Trump has demanded, and they will be sent back into the shadows, or to countries of which they have no memory.” Trump offered Pelosi and congressional Democrats a deal on Saturday. His deal included $800 million in urgent humanitarian assistance, $805 million in new drug detection technology, and three years of legal relief from deportation for DACA recipients in exchange for the $5.7 billion for “strategic deployment of physical barriers” Pelosi was not impressed. She preemptively shot down the proposal in a statement before the president’s announcement. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected] ‘Save The Dreamers’: WaPo Implores Pelosi To Take Trump’s Wall Deal is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust - Conservative News Website for U.S. News, Political Cartoons and more. View the original full article

      in Political Conservative News

    • BuzzFeed Doubles Down On Trump Story, But Won’t Discuss Documents Or Sources |

      By Chuck Ross - BuzzFeed is doubling down on its report that Michael Cohen has told the special counsel that President Trump instructed him to lie to Congress about his dealings in Russia Special Counsel Robert Mueller issued a rare statement rebutting BuzzFeed’s story, but BuzzFeed reporter Anthony Cormier said on CNN on Sunday that he has “further confirmation” that his report is accurate But Cormier also acknowledged on CNN that he is still in the dark about specifically what Cohen told the special counsel, and what precisely Trump allegedly told Cohen BuzzFeed editor Ben Smith and reporter Anthony Cormier doubled down Sunday on their bombshell report that President Trump directed Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about his efforts to build a Trump Tower in Russia. “I have further confirmation that this is right. We are being told to stand our ground. Our reporting is going to be borne out to be accurate, and we’re 100 percent behind it,” Cormier told CNN’s Brian Stelter during an interview about their report, which has been directly disputed by the special counsel’s office. “The same sources that we used in the story are standing behind it, and so are we.” But while Smith and Cormier expressed unwavering confidence in their story, the pair declined to discuss the specifics about how their report came together. Cormier dodged Stelter’s questions about documents that his colleague, Jason Leopold, claims to have seen as part of the reporting process. Cormier also acknowledged that he is not certain what Cohen specifically told the special counsel or what Trump allegedly told Cohen. Cormier and Leopold reported Thursday night that Cohen told the special counsel’s office that Trump directed him to lie to Congress in 2017 about his efforts to build a Trump Tower in Moscow during the 2016 presidential campaign. Citing two unnamed law enforcement officials, the reporters claimed that documents and other witness testimony would corroborate Cohen’s version of events. Democrats jumped on the story, calling for investigations into whether Trump suborned perjury or obstructed justice. Nearly 24 hours after the story appeared, a spokesman for Special Counsel Robert Mueller delivered a devastating rebuttal to the report. “BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the Special Counsel’s Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s Congressional testimony are not accurate,” spokesman Peter Carr said in a statement. The New York Times and Washington Post have since reported that the statement was intended to be a full-throated rebuttal to the claim that Cohen told Mueller’s office that he was told to lie by Trump. But Smith and Cormier remained confident in the face of the Mueller pushback. “What if the sources are just wrong?” Stelter asked Cormier, who won a Pulitzer Prize in 2016. “They’re not. They’re not. I’m confident,” Cormier replied. But while BuzzFeed is refusing to back off of their story, numerous questions remain about what sources and documents were used for the report. In an interview on Friday morning, prior to the Mueller statement, BuzzFeed’s Leopold told MSNBC that he had seen documents referred to in the report. Cormier said in a separate interview with CNN that he had not seen documents. Cormier avoided Stelter’s question about that apparent discrepancy. “Can’t really get into, like, the details there,” Cormier said. “Really at this point because of the calls for a leak investigation and the sort of sensitivity around that matter, we really can’t go any further at all in order to not jeopardize our sources,” he added, noting that Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani had called for an investigation into who leaked information for the BuzzFeed report. BuzzFeed’s spokesman, Matt Mittenthal, issued a similar statement on Saturday, even before Giuliani had called for a leak probe. “In the interest of protecting … sources, we aren’t going to speak further on the details of who saw what and when, beyond what’s in the reporting,” Mittenthal told The Daily Caller News Foundation. Cormier also suggested that BuzzFeed is not quite certain exactly what Cohen may have told the special counsel and what he and Trump may have discussed regarding the former Trump lawyer’s congressional testimony. “We’re trying to figure out how to parse the statement from the Mueller team, and what’s happening now only behind the scenes at DOJ and the special counsel, but we’re trying to get deeper inside the room where this happened,” Cormier said. When asked by Stelter what is known about Trump’s remarks to Cohen, Cormier replied: “We’ll get there eventually, Brian.” When Stelter suggested that perhaps Trump offered something less than a full-throated order to lie to Congress, Cormier said, “we don’t know.” “We’re trying to get the exact language that was used in this conversation, and we’ll get there one day,” he added. “We continue to report like mad, as we always do. But what we reported, that the President of the United States directed Michael Cohen to lie to Congress is accurate. That is fundamentally accurate. We’re going to get inside the room where it happened and bear it out. We’ve taken this to ground here; we’re going to go even further to get inside that room.” In another exchange, Stelter pressed Smith over Leopold’s efforts to request comment from the special counsel prior to running the story. Leopold contacted Peter Carr, the Mueller spokesman, hours before the story ran to say that BuzzFeed was planning to report that Cohen claimed that Trump instructed him to lie to Congress. The request did not say that Cohen made the claim during interactions with the special counsel. Carr, who rarely offers comment to reporters, declined comment. But according to The Washington Post, Carr has since claimed that if he had known precisely what BuzzFeed was planning to report, he would have pushed back harder on the allegation. Stelter blasted Smith and BuzzFeed for what he called a “shockingly casual way to ask for comment for such a serious story” and a “dereliction of duty.” Smith attempted to shift blame to the special counsel, saying that “it has not been our experience that the special counsel has been forthcoming with information.” Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected] BuzzFeed Doubles Down On Trump Story, But Won’t Discuss Documents Or Sources | is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust - Conservative News Website for U.S. News, Political Cartoons and more. View the original full article

      in Political Conservative News

    • Trump Floats Immigration Compromise As Supreme Court Considers DACA Appeal

      By Kevin Daley - President Donald Trump proposed an immigration deal to reopen the government Saturday, which included a three-year extension of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Trump’s overture to congressional Democrats comes as the Supreme Court considers whether it will intervene in ongoing litigation over the president’s attempts to rescind DACA, an Obama-era amnesty initiative that extends temporary legal status to 700,000 foreign nationals who came to the U.S. as children. The administration initiated DACA’s termination in September 2017. Those maneuvers were immediately challenged in federal court. A federal district judge in California ordered the government to continue administering DACA in January 2018. At that juncture, the government broke from normal judicial process and appealed directly to the Supreme Court, instead of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The justices rejected that appeal, returning the case to the 9th Circuit with orders to resolve the case quickly. Over eight months passed without a ruling from the 9th Circuit, so the Trump administration returned to the Supreme Court in November 2018 and asked the justices to take their case. The government’s petition has been pending before the Court since that time. The 9th Circuit issued a decision upholding the district court’s order three days later. Challenges to the president’s attempts to rescind DACA are also pending before appeals courts in New York and Washington, D.C. In the short term, Trump might command a stronger negotiating position if the justices intervene in the DACA cases, since the government can reasonably expect to prevail in the high court. Therefore, Democrats might wish to strike a deal with Trump that includes DACA protections, lest the Supreme Court affirm the president’s power to end the program unilaterally. That the justices have not yet acted on the petition does not bode well for the administration, however. The high court hears arguments from October until April and disposes of its cases by June. As a general matter, the docket for each term is finalized in the middle of January. If the Court intended to grant the administration’s request and hear the case, it likely would have done so by now. As such, the prospect of Supreme Court action on DACA looks dim as of this writing. The high court will next announce action in pending cases on Tuesday. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected] Trump Floats Immigration Compromise As Supreme Court Considers DACA Appeal is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust - Conservative News Website for U.S. News, Political Cartoons and more. View the original full article

      in Political Conservative News

    • Trump offers compromise in border battle, McConnell promises to bring it to a vote, Pelosi says NO

      By R. Mitchell - President Donald Trump offered a serious compromise on immigration reform to Democrats during a live address from the White House Saturday. The proposal includes items that Democrats have been demanding for years, the border patrol has been begging to get and Republicans have asked for all in return for some funding for physical barriers along the U.S. – Mexico border. For Democrats, Trump offered $800 million in urgent humanitarian assistance, a 3-year extension for 700,000 DACA and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) aliens, and his plan would allow minors to apply for asylum in their home countries so they may avoid the dangerous trek through Central America and Mexico only to be turned away at the border. For those that support protecting our nation’s borders, Trump put on the table $805 million for drug detection and interdiction and an additional2,750 border agents and law enforcement professionals. In return, the president asked only for funding for additional physical barriers at the border. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that Trump’s proposal “could actually resolve this impasse” because it “takes a bipartisan approach to re-opening the closed portions of the federal government” unlike the bills coming from the Democrat-led House. McConnell said he intends to move this week on legislation containing the proposal so that a bill can be sent to the House quickly. “The situation for furloughed employees isn’t getting any brighter and the crisis at the border isn’t improved by show votes,” McConnell added. “The President’s plan is a path toward addressing both issues quickly. The head Democrat, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, quickly poo-pood all over the compromise from the president. “It is unlikely that any one of these provisions alone would pass the House, and taken together, they are a non-starter,” Pelosi said. “For one thing, this proposal does not include the permanent solution for the Dreamers and TPS recipients that our country needs and supports.” Pelosi’s only offer was that Trump should stop negotiating and just give her what she wants now and then they can talk about anything he might want later. America has seen this show before and it is unlikely that Trump is going to give in to her uncompromising, childish approach to governance. Content created by Conservative Daily News is available for re-publication without charge under the Creative Commons license. Visit our syndication page for details. Trump offers compromise in border battle, McConnell promises to bring it to a vote, Pelosi says NO is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust - Conservative News Website for U.S. News, Political Cartoons and more. View the original full article

      in Political Conservative News

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.