
In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts vs. EPA that when the U.S. Congress passed the Clean Air Act in 1970, climate science was “in its infancy,” implying that government officials could never have intended for the legislation to cover the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. In 2022, SCOTUS doubled down on that idea, ruling in West Virginia v EPA that since the Clean Air Act didn't explicitly talk about climate change, the EPA cannot regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Now, new historical evidence unearthed by a team of Harvard University researchers led by Naomi Oreskes calls the court's understanding of the history of climate science into question, which could have major implications for the government's ability to regulate climate-changing emissions. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Podzilla Summary coming soon
Sign up to get notified when the full AI-powered summary is ready.
Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.

SLAPP'd Ep 1: How did we get here?

New Drilled Season: SLAPP'd

New Evidence and an Update on U.S. Climate Cases

The Massive Climate Case that Shell Both Won and Lost, and What It Means for the Future of Global Climate Litigation
Free AI-powered recaps of Damages and your other favorite podcasts, delivered to your inbox.
Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.