It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
An under-the-radar provision in a House climate bill would give plaintiffs who claim to be victims of global warming a way to sue the federal government or businesses, according to a report Friday in The Washington Times.
Where would they draw the line?
Environmentalists say the measure was narrowly crafted to give citizens the unusual standing to sue the U.S. government as a way to force action on curbing emissions.
Under the House bill, if a judge rules against the government, new rules would have to be drafted to alleviate the problems associated with climate change. If a judge rules against a company, the company would have to purchase additional "carbon emission allowances" through a cap-and-trade program that is to be created by Congress.
The "citizen suit" would allow people to force government action on climate change
If it was legit, they'd need proof before they could legislate
are you all saying that ANY suit brought would be frivolous; if so, based on what premise?
If i own one of these companies i would set up a shell company and after getting a number of these cases against my company i would cook the books and file bankruptcy and move out side the US with my money.
Originally posted by TheAssociate
reply to post by spinkyboo
You're right, allowing lawsuits would go a long way in giving credence to the green's, and vicariously the NWO's cause. They need for people to believe the hype so they can further their agenda, and what better way than to make the imaginary seem true than to put it on trial.