If one president can permanently ban it, the next can permanently allow it. As if Trump cabinet will care about law, anyway.
this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2025
186 points (98.4% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5452 readers
176 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It is based on the 1953 Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, which allows presidents to protect waters, but it does not allow for that permission to be revoked. So if Trump wants to revoke it, he has to change the law. The Democrats will try to slow it down and the legal system in the US works well enough to allow such projects to be put on hold for some time. It probably is not going to stop Trump, but it will slow things down, which is good.
“By executive order I’m allowing you to drill here”
drilling starts
Company gets sued
Makes its way to SCOTUS
SCOTUS rules it’s okay based on the earlier case about presidential acts being legal while in office
This is a perfect test for that ruling to give it credibility and make it stand up.
Or he can ignore the law and suffer no consequences...
Consequences! Hah! You’re joking right?
By that logic Biden should make every single piece of water that touches the US protected and then force Trump to be the most pro environmental president ever! DO IT NOW BIDEN ADMINISTRATION!!!!!
Permanently meaning ~1 week.
It'll just get restored by the next republican in office.
It's not that simple; it will require either courts to invalidate part of a law, or congress to change the law
Yeah, except that thanks to the sitouts he now has both.
Or the companies to do it anyway, and the president gives police protection to prevent any court officers from enacting any judgement against the company.
Better to have done this than not to have done this... but the republicans have the supreme court and violently do not care about the rules. The mainstream media has also preemptively surrendered to this wave of fascism.
Given that context it feels very dangerous to engage in the fantasy thinking that these types of actions will pose more than a roadbump to fascists in power, not saying we shouldn't do them just I think we are all still stuck in some way or another in a mode of thinking where we want to believe we can win the game by playing by rules that our enemy was specifically elected to destroy because the general population is angry and desperate.
Buckle up :(