Op-ed discusses contentious AEP v. Connecticut
Atlanta partner Doug Henderson and Washington partner Peter Glaser’s op-ed piece “Supreme Court aces climate change ruling,” which discusses “one of the country’s most contentious environmental issues, climate change, in AEP v. Connecticut,” appeared in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on June 30.
“Without taking sides in the climate change debate,” the duo states, “a unanimous court rejected an attempt by California, New York and six other states to circumvent the authority of Congress to determine national energy policy and to force certain industries to cap their carbon dioxide emissions by judicial fiat.”
“Written by Clinton-appointee Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg,” they continue, “the Supreme Court’s decision is not pro-business, and it’s surely not pro-environment or anti-environment.”
Read the op-ed in full to see how Henderson and Glaser contend that “the Supreme Court got it right” in this case, and that under the U.S. Constitution it’s elected representatives that are charged with making policy. “Earth-shattering it’s not,” they state, “but neither a judge nor a jury should determine energy policy in the Unites States.”