Sunday, May 1, 2016

Sue Those Deniers

  The United States is the most litigious country in the world--by far.  Americans sue for just about any reason and have no problem finding unscrupulous lawyers to abet their greed.  In particular, frivolous suits are filed against deep-pocket companies on the expectation that these firms will settle rather than bear the cost of a lengthy trial. 
   We could greatly reduce the incidence of lawsuits by adopting the English Rule (loser pays) and by adopting award caps, as some states have in malpractice cases.  But let’s not forget that most legislators are also lawyers who are not easily persuaded to shut the spigot of cash flowing into their brethren’s coffers.  But at the very least we should expect our government to respect rights guaranteed by our Constitution.  Since when, for example, can someone be prosecuted for disagreeing with the government?  Yet, it is happening right now.
   Last year Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) called for the Justice Department to investigate climate change deniers under the RICO law written to fight organized crime.  Last month Attorney General Loretta Lynch admitted that she had asked the FBI to look into prosecution of climate change deniers for fraud.  Now we learn that prosecutors in New York, California, and the Virgin Islands have opened cases against Exxon-Mobil for just that.  The Obama administration is considering federal action, as well. 
   “Climate change is settled science,” says our President.  Nonsense.  The very nature of science is that it is always searching for greater truth.  Remember Galileo?  In the case of man-caused climate change, the truth is very much debatable.  Thus, prosecuting those whose only crime is disagreeing with the government on this issue is clearly unconstitutional and, even by the standards of the most venal politicians, wildly unethical. 
   President Obama has called climate change the country’s greatest security risk and intends his environmental policies to be his greatest legacy. I predict, rather, that he will be remembered for his assault on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.    

No comments:

Post a Comment