Menu
UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

ADVERTISEMENT
UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting
  • Football
    • 2025 Notre Dame Football Schedule
    • 2024 Notre Dame Roster
    • 2025 Notre Dame Coaching Staff
    • Injury News & Updates
    • Notre Dame Football Depth Charts
    • Notre Dame Point Spreads & Betting Odds
    • Notre Dame Transfers
    • NFL Fighting Irish
    • Game Archive
    • Player Archive
    • Past Seasons & Results
  • Recruiting
    • Commits
    • News & Rumors
    • Class of 2018 Commit List
    • Class of 2019 Commit List
    • Class of 2020 Commit List
    • Class of 2021 Commit List
    • Archives
  • History
    • Notre Dame Bowl History
    • Notre Dame NFL Draft History
    • Notre Dame Football ESPN GameDay History
    • Notre Dame Heisman Trophy Winners
    • Notre Dame Football National Championships
    • Notre Dame Football Rivalries
    • Notre Dame Stadium
    • Touchdown Jesus
  • Basketball
  • Forums
    • Chat Room
    • Football Forum
    • Open Forum
    • Basketball Board
    • Ticket Exchange
  • Videos
    • Notre Dame Basketball Highlights
    • Notre Dame Football Highlights
    • Notre Dame Football Recruiting Highlights
    • Notre Dame Player Highlights
    • Hype Videos
  • Latest News
  • Gear
  • About
    • Advertise With Us
    • Contact Us
    • Our RSS Feeds
    • Community Rules
    • Privacy Policy
  • RSS
  • YouTube
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Home > Forums > The Open Forum
Login | Register
Upvote this post.
4
Downvote this post.

Trump's Climate Liberation Act

Author: Nigel Tufnel (8298 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 12:09 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

Every word of this! The No Kings clowns should applaud this rollback of executive overreach, but that was Obama so of course that was different.

Trump’s Climate Liberation Act
Removing Obama’s ‘endangerment’ finding makes it harder to ban fossil-fuel energy.
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
Feb. 12, 2026 5:45 pm ET

The Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday at long last repealed Barack Obama’s so-called endangerment finding that declared greenhouse gas emissions a threat to public health and safety. Cue the apocalyptic warnings unhinged from reality. What progressives really fear is that they won’t be able to dictate the energy supplies, cars and appliances that Americans can buy.

Progressives recognize the importance of Thursday’s news. A New York Times headline says “Trump Allies Near ‘Total Victory’ in Wiping Out U.S. Climate Regulation.” That could be true if the Administration prevails against the inevitable legal challenges.

As a refresher, in 2007 a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. EPA that greenhouse gases qualify as pollutants under the Clean Air Act. The law requires the EPA to regulate pollutants if it determines they can “reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” Thus arose the Obama endangerment finding, which established the legal basis for the EPA to regulate CO2, which wasn’t mentioned in the Clean Air Act.

But greenhouse gases aren’t toxic and don’t affect air quality, unlike pollutants that the law expressly directs the EPA to regulate. The Obama endangerment finding claims this distinction doesn’t matter because CO2 contributes to rising temperatures, which could indirectly result in downstream harms such as more wildfires, storms and disease.

Most of the “science” in the Obama finding is debatable, as the Trump team notes. The impact of greenhouse gases on global temperatures is intermediated by such factors as cloud cover and urbanization, and the effect on storms is disputed. In any event, curbing CO2 emissions in the U.S. will have scant impact on climate because emissions are rapidly rising in China, India and developing countries.

The real import of the finding was to give the Obama and Biden teams legal license to mandate electric cars and force fossil-fuel power plants to shut down. Trump EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has moved to roll back the Biden regulatory overreaches. But as long as the endangerment finding is in effect, a future Democratic President could reimpose the Biden climate diktats and go even further—say, by banning petroleum-powered lawn mowers and gas space heaters or stoves.

Repealing the endangerment finding could stop this regulatory ping-pong. The climate lobby is sure to challenge the rescission, which could then tee up a case for the Supreme Court to revisit its misconceived Massachusetts. v. EPA precedent. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented in that case, and Justice Anthony Kennedy, who supplied the fifth vote, has retired from the Court.

The Great Scalia observed in dissent that “regulating the buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the upper reaches of the atmosphere . . . is not akin to regulating the concentration of some substance that is polluting the air.” As the Trump team notes, the endangerment finding also violates the Supreme Court’s major questions doctrine.

That doctrine holds that express authorization from Congress is required for economically and politically significant executive actions. A 6-3 majority invoked the doctrine in West Virginia v. EPA (2022), which struck down the Obama-era CO2 emissions limits for power plants. EPA’s arrogation of sweeping authority to regulate CO2 is without doubt a major question.

The scope of CO2 regulation is a decision for Congress. It’s richly ironic for Democrats who denounce Mr. Trump as an authoritarian to howl that he’s relinquishing power to regulate all corners of the economy under the guise of climate that the Biden and Obama administrations unilaterally claimed.


Link: No Kings

'I define fear as standing across from Joe Louis and knowing he wants to go home early.' - Max Baer

Replies to: Trump's Climate Liberation Act


Thread Level: 2

"Exxon disputed Climate findings for years...it's scientists knew better"...the O&G Industry is

Author: TyroneIrish (23632 Posts - Joined: Oct 8, 2020)

Posted at 4:36 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

demonstrating the classic corporate failure taught in MBA programs...i.e. total reliance on its Cash Cow and not adjusting to changes in its industry...which is ENERGY...to the detriment of this nation's future...in more ways than one. Trump only needs a relatively modest donation to lend his support.

Link: https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/01/harvard-led-analysis-finds-exxonmobil-internal-research-accurately-predicted-climate-change/

Thread Level: 2

Pollution bad but look no further than Europe to see the damage of bad energy policy

Author: LanceManion (9926 Posts - Joined: Jul 16, 2010)

Posted at 1:15 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

Germany is simultaneously backing a war with Russia while purchasing their natural resources. Just dumb.

Imposing corporate abuse, neglect and greed on deserving victims.
Thread Level: 3

…and the Dow is at 50,000. Why not post that. Makes as much sense.

Author: jimbasil (54118 Posts - Joined: Nov 15, 2007)

Posted at 2:36 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

(no message)

Jack, he is a banker
and Jane, she is a clerk
Thread Level: 4

I don’t have the energy to connect all the dots for you. Not that complicated.

Author: LanceManion (9926 Posts - Joined: Jul 16, 2010)

Posted at 5:29 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

(no message)

Imposing corporate abuse, neglect and greed on deserving victims.
Thread Level: 5

.

Author: BaronVonZemo (62684 Posts - Joined: Nov 19, 2010)

Posted at 5:55 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

(no message)

This message has been edited 2 time(s).

Thread Level: 5

You don’t have any dots to connect. You haven’t been right on anything for years.

Author: jimbasil (54118 Posts - Joined: Nov 15, 2007)

Posted at 5:52 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

(no message)

Jack, he is a banker
and Jane, she is a clerk
Thread Level: 6

I was right on the stock market last spring

Author: LanceManion (9926 Posts - Joined: Jul 16, 2010)

Posted at 7:30 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

(no message)

Imposing corporate abuse, neglect and greed on deserving victims.
Thread Level: 7

All well and good…but you missed the boat on mayonnaise futures…

Author: TakethetrainKnute (34931 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 9:04 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

It’s almost like you’re, MAGAperfect.

Author: jimbasil (54118 Posts - Joined: Nov 15, 2007)

Posted at 12:41 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

(no message)

Jack, he is a banker
and Jane, she is a clerk
Thread Level: 3

Removing a presidential edict that restricts rights of all Americans is what "No Kings" means.

Author: BaronVonZemo (62684 Posts - Joined: Nov 19, 2010)

Posted at 1:08 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

In reality, liberals want a king when their guy is in office (note how the Dems happily embraced all of Obama's many edicts). They do NOT accept any such behavior from a president of their political opponents party, even when the "behavior" is simply removing the dictatorial edicts.

This message has been edited 1 time(s).

Thread Level: 4

Your statement is beyond ridiculous. MAGAperfect

Author: jimbasil (54118 Posts - Joined: Nov 15, 2007)

Posted at 2:33 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

(no message)

Jack, he is a banker
and Jane, she is a clerk
Thread Level: 5

Another, "Oh yeah!" post. Try harder.

Author: BaronVonZemo (62684 Posts - Joined: Nov 19, 2010)

Posted at 5:45 pm on Feb 13, 2026
View Single

(no message)


Consent Management

Close
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • RSS