Carrie Severino - Did The Court Just Stop Climate Lawsuits?

The Supreme Court just handed energy companies a major win, making it easier to move climate lawsuits out of state courts and into federal courts. Supporters say it reins in legal overreach, while critics argue it limits accountability for environmental damage.

Carrie Severino, President of the Judicial Crisis Network, joins the program to break down what the ruling means and whether it signals a turning point in climate litigation.

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:04

Welcome back to the program. It's a pleasure to be with you. I'm glad to get to your phone calls and emails at 866-Hey Lars. That's 866-439-5277. Send your emails to talk at LarsLarson.com. Naysayers always go to the head of the line. I gotta tell you, the Supreme Court has just shut down one of the major tools that was used by America's political left to destroy America's energy prospects. Is the era of climate litigation warfare finally coming to an end? I thought I'd put that question to our friend Kerry Campbell Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network. It's great to be here. So would you mind describing for my audience what it is, how the courts have been used by the climate lobby to go after and apparently bankrupt American energy companies?

SPEAKER_01 0:52

Yeah, this is big business for them because they've now acknowledged some of these litigators have acknowledged their goal isn't really even to just win a particular case. They actually want to bankrupt the energy industry. This is their method of stopping oil production, and they think maybe saving the world and and the environment. But what has been they've been doing is leveraging friendly courts and friendly municipalities that they think they can cooperate with to win these big cases. Well, the Supreme Court just eight to zero uh smacked down one of those efforts last week, and that's really exciting. They were trying to sue Chevron for actions amazingly, during World War II, they were they were obviously trying to pump gas, you know, for they had some reasons, and it might have had something to do with trying to liberate Europe from the Nazis. I don't know. But put that aside, we don't think they should have been using, you know, this or that d vertical drilling technique that the U.S. Army wanted them to use. And the crazy thing is they're suing under a law passed in 1980. So 40 years later, we had a law that that that limited this, and we're gonna go back and try to blame them for. I mean, it's it's it's ludicrous legal theories, but in these local courts, they were they were winning. And uh the Supreme Court said you can't do that.

SPEAKER_00 2:08

I mean, this isn't quite my cousin Vinny, but can you imagine a major oil company that comes in and you know, they're lawyers, and then they got the local lawyer, and I'm sure they picked somebody who deliberately shops at the bargain basement stops and shows up. I'm I'm just a poor country lawyer here to represent the uh the uh environmental interests of the people of Louisiana against these evil, you know, big city uh oil company types. That's what they wanted in front of a local jury and a local state court.

SPEAKER_01 2:39

Well, and what they what they got from the Supreme Court is the resounding uh recognition that when a company, whether it's an oil company, anyone anyone who's a subcontractor of the government is working on a government contract, they at least have the right to have that heard in a federal court. Look, federal court, we all know federal district courts aren't perfect. They make mistakes too. But boy, it's it's a whole yeah, a little bit, but um it's a whole lot better than having people from the same county that is gonna stands to win, you know, millions of dollars of windfall, hundreds of millions of dollars, from these companies. If you you think they're gonna get a fair shake there, I don't think so. And it's amazing because every single justice, even Justice Jackson, Justice Alito was recused, but every other justice agreed, yeah, the statute has to be read this way. And boy, that's a relief.

SPEAKER_00 3:29

Hold on, Cherry. It wasn't it wasn't Kotenji Brown Jackson who voted. This was eight to nothing. So who who recused in that case?

SPEAKER_01 3:40

So Justice Alito, because he owned some stock, you know, it was it was like one of these, you know, indirect ticket financial things, but great, uh, you know, he it didn't it didn't make difference the case because this really was an open and shut case. Justice Jackson, because we all know she does like to talk and make her opinion known, she wrote a separate opinion just to say, I don't know, stuff. But um, but he agreed with the result, which is pretty impressive. You've got Justice Thomas writing the opinion, and you've got Justice Jackson agreeing. That tells you it's a pretty open and shut case. That's great news.

SPEAKER_00 4:10

You know, I know this is a side issue, but Carrie, I'm talking to Carrie Campbell, uh Severino, who's president of the Judicial Crisis Network. Is is Katinji Brown Jackson wising up at all? Because early on, she was one of these uh uh the the only associate justice I can think of where she seemed a dumber than a non-lawyer. I mean, she just seemed like she would say anything that came into her head, and even the other justices were a bit perplexed by what in the world is she talking about? Uh, and I and I wondered, has has she has her performance improved at all?

SPEAKER_01 4:46

Well, um, you know, no comment. I think I think she's uh let's just say she's not the most persuasive. I think I think he was not a great pick for President Biden to put up simply for the reason that she is not uh being able to advance her cause terribly well because she's not a persuasive um arguer. She sometimes will, you know, she she is known for talking a lot, she's known for writing a lot, um, but a lot of times she lashes on to theories that the other justices aren't particularly persuaded by. Someone like a Justice Kagan, um, who is is very savvy and very manipulative, in my opinion. Um and she's really good at making those appeals. So I think this is, you know, another reminder that Biden maybe should have been prioritizing some different things when he was looking for justices rather than just checking different boxes.

SPEAKER_00 5:34

You mean you mean he shouldn't have just said, I'm gonna do an affirmative action hire and hire a black female? Because that's what he did. I mean, and and Carrie, I gotta just be honest, I keep using KJB and Kamala Harris as the two primary examples of this is what happens when affirmative action gets taken to the nth degree, is you end up with people like this. You know, people who d d not are not very smart, are not very impressive. I mean, if you were if you were picking and said, we're using DEI to pick somebody, and you pick somebody and everybody had to agree, I may not like their politics, but boy are they sharp. They're right on top of all the issues. Half the time, it's like you read KJB's, and I've read some of her opinions, and she's just babbling on about stuff and doesn't seem to even understand the law behind the cases.

SPEAKER_01 6:20

Yeah, I mean, again, unfortunately on his part, but if that's what you're what you're doing, that's not to say, like, look, Justice Thomas, an amazing black justice, one of the intellectual leaders of the court, just because they you know they're a member of a different minority group. Okay, Justice Kagan is a female justice, I think she's very effective in a sort of evil genius type of way. Um I can just because you're a member of your woman or a member of minority group, doesn't mean you're gonna be a bad pick. No. I'm just saying that shouldn't be the only reason the person is picked.

SPEAKER_00 6:47

No, and it shouldn't be the primary cause. That's Carrie Severino. Carrie, thank you very much from the Judicial Crisis Network. By the way, folks, most people think waking up in the middle of the night is just part of life. It's regular sleep. But doctors now say those nighttime wakeups, they could be affecting your long-term health. That means inflammation. It means immune function, it even means memory and mental acuity. I used to think that a mattress was just another piece of furniture until I got my ghost bed. Because ghost bed doesn't build mattresses like furniture. They build engineered sleep systems, serious health equipment designed for relief and recovery, not looks and not fluff. Your body should be healing while you sleep, not trying to fight to get comfortable. Ghost bed fixes that. Ghost bed's engineered cooling prevents overheating, and that's been a major problem for me, a major cause of nighttime wakeups. You wake up and you think, I'm too hot. I know it's comfortable in the house, but the bed makes you feel too hot. Precision support keeps your spine aligned. I noticed that difference right away. And deeper sleep. That means when you wake up clearer mornings and actually feeling rested at the end of a night's sleep. You can try it for yourself. 101 nights risk-free. Right now, Ghostbed is having their spring sale. That means an extra 10% off just for the audience of the Lars Larson show. Just do this. Go to Ghostbed, one word, G-H-O-S-T-Bed, Ghostbed.com slash Lars, and use promo code Lars. That's ghostbed.com slash Lars. Promo code Lars. You're gonna love your Ghostbed. 101 nights. Try it. If you don't like it, you send back send it back without any worries at all. Coming up in a moment, an Iranian woman with a U.S. green card living the glamorous life while allegedly arming a foreign war zone for Tehran. We're gonna talk about that case up next on the Lars Larson Show.