We haven’t commented on California’s ambitious attorney general Bill Lockyer’s excesses lately. Oversight or burnout?
Probably the latter. How many times can you point out ridiculous, anti-competitive nature of his global-warming-inspired lawsuit against auto manufacturers without repeating yourself? Really, suing auto manufacturers because their much-desired, purchased, consumed, legal products are…desired….purchased…consumed …AND LEGAL ….is the height of overreach.
Nevertheless, Bruce Fein does such a fine job of driving home the absurdum in the reductio, we can’t help but cite him:
Mr. Lockyer confined his suit to six auto manufacturers rather than lash out at the planet to give his litigation a politically attractive coloration. According to the complaint, the defendants’ vehicles account for but a fraction of annual carbon dioxide emissions in the United States and California.
Why didn’t he sue every source of carbon dioxide emissions, including coal-fired power plants? Why didn’t he sue vehicle drivers and electricity users? They know their driving and electricity use will create greenhouse gases, and thus lie at the core of Mr. Lockyer’s theory of liability. If he were principled rather than expedient, he would have named himself, the presiding federal judge, and President Bush as defendants for knowingly and intentionally contributing to global warming every time they drive a car or turn on a light.
Mr. Fein’s commentary evokes chuckles. Which, we suppose, should be regulated in a Lockyer regime.