1 00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:00,480 Speaker 1: Michael. 2 00:00:00,520 --> 00:00:05,120 Speaker 2: I can remember from decades ago, probably over forty years ago. 3 00:00:05,160 --> 00:00:10,440 Speaker 1: Thinking statedy, you need address. Stuff is just overblown. Bs. 4 00:00:10,640 --> 00:00:12,840 Speaker 1: I don't care who. It doesn't matter who's giving me 5 00:00:12,920 --> 00:00:16,000 Speaker 1: a dress. They've all just been look at us. 6 00:00:16,079 --> 00:00:20,320 Speaker 2: We're cheer, needing, we're campaigning, vomit. 7 00:00:22,960 --> 00:00:25,079 Speaker 3: And people tell me I need to chill out this 8 00:00:25,160 --> 00:00:32,360 Speaker 3: morning yesterday, which Dragon balls yesterd It was Monday, right correct? 9 00:00:32,479 --> 00:00:36,360 Speaker 3: It was the twenty third, right correct? Yeah, okay, Wednesday, Wednesday? Okay, 10 00:00:36,680 --> 00:00:38,760 Speaker 3: just want to make sure because Dragon's got emails that 11 00:00:38,800 --> 00:00:42,600 Speaker 3: said he needed to do something by Wednesday, February twenty third, 12 00:00:42,920 --> 00:00:46,279 Speaker 3: which I don't know what. Yeah, I don't know what 13 00:00:46,320 --> 00:00:49,000 Speaker 3: month or year they're talking about. Did you check that? 14 00:00:49,960 --> 00:00:50,519 Speaker 3: Did you check the. 15 00:00:50,560 --> 00:00:51,160 Speaker 1: Year in the month. 16 00:00:51,800 --> 00:00:53,199 Speaker 4: I was a little concerned when I first saw it 17 00:00:53,320 --> 00:00:54,840 Speaker 4: said Wednesday, the twenty third. I was like, well, maybe, 18 00:00:54,840 --> 00:00:57,080 Speaker 4: surely they mean the twenty fifth. But later on in 19 00:00:57,080 --> 00:00:59,920 Speaker 4: the email, in multiple other spots, they quoted twenty third, 20 00:01:00,160 --> 00:01:03,240 Speaker 4: the third, the twenty third, So I jumped on it 21 00:01:03,320 --> 00:01:05,680 Speaker 4: right then and there, and turns out about an hour 22 00:01:05,760 --> 00:01:08,040 Speaker 4: later an email pops up and says, oops, I meant 23 00:01:08,040 --> 00:01:08,720 Speaker 4: the twenty fifth. 24 00:01:08,720 --> 00:01:09,839 Speaker 1: It's like, Wow, Okayvin. 25 00:01:10,200 --> 00:01:12,400 Speaker 2: Thanks. 26 00:01:12,880 --> 00:01:16,840 Speaker 1: Yesterday February twenty third, the US Supreme. 27 00:01:16,480 --> 00:01:20,480 Speaker 3: Court is something that it has conspicuously avoided doing for years. 28 00:01:21,480 --> 00:01:24,120 Speaker 1: It agreed to settle, at least once and for all, or. 29 00:01:24,080 --> 00:01:27,600 Speaker 3: At least until the Court overrules it somewhere down decades 30 00:01:27,640 --> 00:01:31,760 Speaker 3: from now. It decided to settle whether or not cities 31 00:01:31,800 --> 00:01:36,880 Speaker 3: and counties across the country can drag oil and gas 32 00:01:36,959 --> 00:01:41,679 Speaker 3: companies into state court extract billions of dollars in climate 33 00:01:41,760 --> 00:01:48,320 Speaker 3: change damages based on state tort law. The case is 34 00:01:49,520 --> 00:01:54,760 Speaker 3: Sun Court Energy versus County Commissioners of Boulder County. Yes, 35 00:01:55,680 --> 00:02:00,120 Speaker 3: Boulder has been suing trying to drag Sun Court. We're 36 00:02:00,120 --> 00:02:03,240 Speaker 3: in a bunch of other oil and gas companies to 37 00:02:03,280 --> 00:02:08,280 Speaker 3: collect damages for worldwide global change. 38 00:02:08,720 --> 00:02:11,040 Speaker 1: So the People's Republic of Boulder. 39 00:02:11,160 --> 00:02:14,480 Speaker 3: Has spent eight years now trying to make Exxon Mobile 40 00:02:14,520 --> 00:02:18,120 Speaker 3: and Suncrep pay for what it calls the consequences of 41 00:02:18,200 --> 00:02:23,480 Speaker 3: climate change. So yesterday the nine Justices said, hey, we'll 42 00:02:23,480 --> 00:02:26,480 Speaker 3: hear that argument, but here's the thing that should make 43 00:02:26,520 --> 00:02:30,920 Speaker 3: you that or should make Boulders lawyers lose some sleep. 44 00:02:32,000 --> 00:02:37,960 Speaker 3: The Court didn't just take that case. It expanded the questions. 45 00:02:38,040 --> 00:02:43,000 Speaker 3: They wanted the lawyers to breathe, Now, that never happens 46 00:02:43,000 --> 00:02:45,880 Speaker 3: if the court is planning to simply rubber stamp a 47 00:02:46,000 --> 00:02:50,200 Speaker 3: lower court decision. So how did we get here eight 48 00:02:50,280 --> 00:02:54,079 Speaker 3: years of nothing more than legal ping pong. The lawsuit 49 00:02:54,120 --> 00:02:58,919 Speaker 3: was originally filed in Boulder County District Court on April seventeen, 50 00:02:59,000 --> 00:03:03,680 Speaker 3: twenty eighteen. Boulder County and the City of Boulder, using 51 00:03:03,720 --> 00:03:07,880 Speaker 3: taxpayer money suit Exon Mobile and several sun Core entities. 52 00:03:07,919 --> 00:03:13,600 Speaker 3: They alleged to the company's unchecked production, promotion, refining, marketing, 53 00:03:13,680 --> 00:03:18,360 Speaker 3: and sale of fossil fuels around the world contributed to 54 00:03:18,400 --> 00:03:23,560 Speaker 3: climate change and that in turn caused Colorado to experience 55 00:03:23,960 --> 00:03:30,320 Speaker 3: more extreme heat waves, wildfires, droughts, and floods now. The 56 00:03:30,360 --> 00:03:34,240 Speaker 3: Marshall fire back in twenty twenty one, the most destruct 57 00:03:34,240 --> 00:03:36,840 Speaker 3: you so far in our history, burn over a thousand 58 00:03:36,880 --> 00:03:39,360 Speaker 3: homes and caused more than two billion dollars in damage, 59 00:03:39,960 --> 00:03:44,839 Speaker 3: is exhibit A. In this emotional argument, the plainness want 60 00:03:44,920 --> 00:03:49,880 Speaker 3: unspecified monetary damages, all future costs, and essentially that they 61 00:03:49,920 --> 00:03:54,160 Speaker 3: want the court to declare that Exxon and Suncore, all 62 00:03:54,160 --> 00:03:58,480 Speaker 3: the entities involved, should write checks to cover boulders climate 63 00:03:58,560 --> 00:04:04,680 Speaker 3: adaptation budget in perpetuity. Now, what followed from that initial 64 00:04:04,680 --> 00:04:08,280 Speaker 3: filing back in twenty eighteen really ought to be part 65 00:04:08,320 --> 00:04:12,880 Speaker 3: of any law school's civil procedure final exam, because the 66 00:04:12,920 --> 00:04:17,040 Speaker 3: oil companies immediately moved the case to federal court in 67 00:04:17,160 --> 00:04:19,960 Speaker 3: Denver because they argued that the claims that I believe 68 00:04:20,000 --> 00:04:22,000 Speaker 3: rightfully so belonged in federal court. 69 00:04:22,800 --> 00:04:25,880 Speaker 1: But the federal court here disagreed and sent it back 70 00:04:25,920 --> 00:04:26,680 Speaker 1: to state court. 71 00:04:27,560 --> 00:04:30,840 Speaker 3: The companies appealed that back to the US Tenth Circuit 72 00:04:30,880 --> 00:04:34,440 Speaker 3: in Denver, which sided with the lower court and said, yeah, 73 00:04:34,480 --> 00:04:38,479 Speaker 3: this is a state court matter. Unbelievable. And then the 74 00:04:38,480 --> 00:04:42,040 Speaker 3: case just continued bouncing around while the company simultaneously tried 75 00:04:42,040 --> 00:04:45,799 Speaker 3: to get the state proceedings dismissed, arguing that, wait a minute, 76 00:04:45,839 --> 00:04:48,880 Speaker 3: what are we arguing about here, because federal law preempts 77 00:04:48,920 --> 00:04:52,119 Speaker 3: the entire thing. So the Supreme Court took an early 78 00:04:52,120 --> 00:04:55,440 Speaker 3: look at the procedural question all the way back in 79 00:04:55,480 --> 00:04:59,640 Speaker 3: twenty twenty one. It was in another case the built 80 00:04:59,800 --> 00:05:03,560 Speaker 3: the Baltimore case, and they ruled in favor of the 81 00:05:03,560 --> 00:05:07,480 Speaker 3: oil companies on a very narrow procedural point and held 82 00:05:07,520 --> 00:05:12,400 Speaker 3: that appellate courts could review the orders, remanding it back 83 00:05:12,440 --> 00:05:16,680 Speaker 3: to state court. In twenty twenty three, the Supreme Court 84 00:05:16,800 --> 00:05:21,120 Speaker 3: declined to take up the substantie preemption argument about it's hey, 85 00:05:21,200 --> 00:05:24,560 Speaker 3: this is a federal issue, not a state issue, and 86 00:05:24,600 --> 00:05:27,480 Speaker 3: they refused to take that up when the energy companies 87 00:05:27,520 --> 00:05:32,200 Speaker 3: first knocked on the Supreme Court door. That refusal gave 88 00:05:32,279 --> 00:05:36,120 Speaker 3: Boulder a temporary reprieve, and of course made them pound 89 00:05:36,160 --> 00:05:41,120 Speaker 3: their chests, and that emboldened other cities and states all 90 00:05:41,160 --> 00:05:44,640 Speaker 3: across the country to start the same kind of bull crap. 91 00:05:46,120 --> 00:05:50,159 Speaker 3: Then in May of last year, the Supreme Court issued 92 00:05:50,160 --> 00:05:54,840 Speaker 3: a five to two ruling in Colorado, just as Richard Gabriel, 93 00:05:54,880 --> 00:05:58,520 Speaker 3: writing from the majority, that Boulder state law claims were 94 00:05:58,560 --> 00:06:01,919 Speaker 3: not preempted by federal way. Now there was a descent 95 00:06:02,560 --> 00:06:08,039 Speaker 3: file by Justice Carlos Somemour was remarkable in clarity, opening 96 00:06:08,040 --> 00:06:11,599 Speaker 3: with a reference to the Pledge of Allegiance and warning 97 00:06:11,640 --> 00:06:14,839 Speaker 3: that what the majority was effectively giving Bolder permission to 98 00:06:14,880 --> 00:06:21,440 Speaker 3: do was to act as its own republic. I thought 99 00:06:21,480 --> 00:06:24,520 Speaker 3: that it was a damn good descent. Now some more 100 00:06:24,520 --> 00:06:28,320 Speaker 3: would have ended the case right there, but the Colorado majority, 101 00:06:28,720 --> 00:06:34,320 Speaker 3: being the progressives that they are, was very careful. They 102 00:06:34,320 --> 00:06:37,000 Speaker 3: wanted to say. Our ruly is very narrow. It only 103 00:06:37,040 --> 00:06:40,800 Speaker 3: addresses the preemption, meaning whether under a law preempt state 104 00:06:40,880 --> 00:06:43,880 Speaker 3: law or not, and did not address whether Boulder could 105 00:06:43,920 --> 00:06:47,960 Speaker 3: actually win on the merits of the case. So Exon 106 00:06:48,000 --> 00:06:51,880 Speaker 3: and Suncourt promptly appealed to the Supreme Court. Now the 107 00:06:51,880 --> 00:06:55,919 Speaker 3: Trump administration obviously had it makes no secret they have 108 00:06:56,000 --> 00:07:00,520 Speaker 3: hostility toward these kind of climate lawsuits. Well, they took 109 00:07:00,520 --> 00:07:02,760 Speaker 3: the rare step of filing an a meekus brief, a 110 00:07:02,760 --> 00:07:06,080 Speaker 3: friend of the court brief, urging the court to take 111 00:07:06,120 --> 00:07:09,120 Speaker 3: the case even though the federal government is not a 112 00:07:09,160 --> 00:07:13,560 Speaker 3: party to the case. And yesterday the court agreed. So 113 00:07:13,720 --> 00:07:20,920 Speaker 3: Boulder's lawsuit is really a master class in progressive legal creativity. 114 00:07:22,160 --> 00:07:23,520 Speaker 1: I got to give them what. 115 00:07:25,160 --> 00:07:29,440 Speaker 3: I got to give their lawyer's credit for ambition, even 116 00:07:29,480 --> 00:07:33,880 Speaker 3: if their theories are built on sand. So that there 117 00:07:33,880 --> 00:07:37,200 Speaker 3: are several core claims. So let's walk through some. 118 00:07:37,240 --> 00:07:39,240 Speaker 1: Of them first. 119 00:07:39,240 --> 00:07:42,760 Speaker 3: They argue, and this is the main argument, that what 120 00:07:42,880 --> 00:07:45,800 Speaker 3: these oil and gas companies are doing is creating a 121 00:07:45,920 --> 00:07:50,080 Speaker 3: both a public and a private nuisance. Bowlders are arguing 122 00:07:50,080 --> 00:07:53,800 Speaker 3: that the company's global production and their global marketing and 123 00:07:53,880 --> 00:08:00,760 Speaker 3: fossil fuels constitutes an unreasonable interference with public rights. Wait 124 00:08:00,760 --> 00:08:04,920 Speaker 3: a minute, you're asking yourself what rights? Well, Volder argues 125 00:08:05,400 --> 00:08:08,720 Speaker 3: that you have a right to a stable climate, and 126 00:08:08,800 --> 00:08:12,280 Speaker 3: you have a right to property free from an increased 127 00:08:12,440 --> 00:08:18,600 Speaker 3: risk of wildfire and flood. How the hell private nuisance 128 00:08:18,640 --> 00:08:23,560 Speaker 3: claims extend this to specific interference with the county's property 129 00:08:23,720 --> 00:08:30,400 Speaker 3: entrance interests. Now, Nuisance as a legal theory is as 130 00:08:30,600 --> 00:08:34,559 Speaker 3: old as civilization, which is precisely why these plaints and 131 00:08:34,600 --> 00:08:37,720 Speaker 3: Bolder love it and why the defense lawyers fear it. 132 00:08:38,360 --> 00:08:41,280 Speaker 3: But it has historically required that there has to be 133 00:08:41,320 --> 00:08:44,720 Speaker 3: some sort of nexus between what the defendants in this case, 134 00:08:44,760 --> 00:08:48,720 Speaker 3: the oil and gas companies, are doing, and the plaintiff's injury. 135 00:08:48,800 --> 00:08:52,559 Speaker 3: There's got to be some direct nexus there. It's got 136 00:08:52,600 --> 00:08:56,200 Speaker 3: to be more direct than your product combined with somebody 137 00:08:56,200 --> 00:09:00,720 Speaker 3: else's product over decades and decades somehow contribut to global 138 00:09:00,760 --> 00:09:05,280 Speaker 3: atmospheric warming which made this fire, the Marshall fire, worse 139 00:09:05,320 --> 00:09:07,320 Speaker 3: than it would have been. I mean, that is as 140 00:09:07,400 --> 00:09:10,440 Speaker 3: tenuous as you can get, but that's their main argument. 141 00:09:12,440 --> 00:09:18,360 Speaker 3: Another novel theory, in my opinion, is trespass. Boulder is 142 00:09:18,360 --> 00:09:23,400 Speaker 3: trying to claim that greenhouse gas constitute a physical invasion 143 00:09:24,640 --> 00:09:30,680 Speaker 3: of older Okay, I got a great idea. Let's put 144 00:09:30,720 --> 00:09:34,760 Speaker 3: a glass dome over Boulder, just over the entire county 145 00:09:35,520 --> 00:09:38,520 Speaker 3: and just say no, tell you what you want, oxygen, 146 00:09:38,600 --> 00:09:41,520 Speaker 3: you want, plants, everything. You got to create your own, 147 00:09:41,520 --> 00:09:44,239 Speaker 3: greenhouse gases, you got to create your own atmosphere. 148 00:09:44,400 --> 00:09:45,280 Speaker 1: Just do it on your own. 149 00:09:46,320 --> 00:09:54,840 Speaker 3: They're literally arguing that greenhouse gases are physically invading its property. Now, 150 00:09:54,880 --> 00:09:58,040 Speaker 3: that is so creative to the point of being absurd. 151 00:09:59,120 --> 00:10:03,840 Speaker 3: A classic track pass argument requires a direct, intentional physical 152 00:10:03,880 --> 00:10:07,840 Speaker 3: intrusion on land. So what they're doing here is they're 153 00:10:07,960 --> 00:10:12,080 Speaker 3: arguing that carbon dioxide molecules that drift through the global 154 00:10:12,080 --> 00:10:18,920 Speaker 3: atmosphere somehow constitute trespass onto Boulder County property. Now that 155 00:10:19,120 --> 00:10:24,080 Speaker 3: stretches the reading of common law torque theory or trespass 156 00:10:24,160 --> 00:10:27,680 Speaker 3: theory beyond anything reasonable that I've ever seen in my 157 00:10:27,840 --> 00:10:30,880 Speaker 3: entire life. And I think this theory is the weakest 158 00:10:30,920 --> 00:10:33,600 Speaker 3: in the entire lawsuit. And it's telling that it's there. 159 00:10:34,000 --> 00:10:36,480 Speaker 3: It signals the planets are just throwing everything on the 160 00:10:36,480 --> 00:10:37,760 Speaker 3: wall that they can find. 161 00:10:38,720 --> 00:10:39,600 Speaker 1: But it gets worse. 162 00:10:41,440 --> 00:10:46,360 Speaker 3: They argue unjust enrichment now here's the theory that Exceon 163 00:10:46,400 --> 00:10:51,319 Speaker 3: and sun Core were enriched by selling fossil fuels, and 164 00:10:51,360 --> 00:10:56,240 Speaker 3: then they externalize the cost of climate change onto the 165 00:10:56,320 --> 00:11:00,160 Speaker 3: municipalities like Boulder, and Boulder argues that it would be 166 00:11:00,240 --> 00:11:04,560 Speaker 3: inequitable to allow the oil companies to keep those profits. 167 00:11:05,200 --> 00:11:09,679 Speaker 3: So it's really a theory of restitution. The problem here 168 00:11:10,080 --> 00:11:16,120 Speaker 3: is that unjust enrichment requires a direct relationship, a direct 169 00:11:16,160 --> 00:11:22,400 Speaker 3: transaction between the parties, a benefit conferred by the plaintiff 170 00:11:22,559 --> 00:11:26,800 Speaker 3: on the defendant. Well, Boulder didn't give Exon anything. Boulder 171 00:11:26,840 --> 00:11:30,640 Speaker 3: residents may have purchased gas from an Axon station, but 172 00:11:30,760 --> 00:11:35,160 Speaker 3: the city government, the county government has no direct transactional 173 00:11:35,280 --> 00:11:39,359 Speaker 3: relationship with the companies that could possibly support that claim. 174 00:11:39,520 --> 00:11:46,880 Speaker 3: They're throwing everything on the wall. Then they argue civil conspiracy. Oh, 175 00:11:47,240 --> 00:11:50,560 Speaker 3: we all love a good conspiracy, right. I think this 176 00:11:50,960 --> 00:11:54,560 Speaker 3: is nothing more than a politically charged assertion. 177 00:11:55,280 --> 00:11:56,400 Speaker 1: Here's what Boulder does. 178 00:11:57,559 --> 00:12:02,079 Speaker 3: Boulder alleges that the oil companies participated in a conspiracy 179 00:12:02,160 --> 00:12:05,800 Speaker 3: for decades to try to deceive you and me about 180 00:12:05,840 --> 00:12:09,440 Speaker 3: the climate effects of burning fossil fuels, that the oil 181 00:12:09,480 --> 00:12:13,880 Speaker 3: and gas companies suppressed their own internal scientific research and 182 00:12:13,920 --> 00:12:18,319 Speaker 3: then they engaged in a misinformation campaign. So this kind 183 00:12:18,360 --> 00:12:20,480 Speaker 3: of becomes a what did they know and when did 184 00:12:20,480 --> 00:12:24,680 Speaker 3: they know it? Theory that comes directly out of what yes, 185 00:12:25,200 --> 00:12:29,800 Speaker 3: the tobacco lawsuits that did indeed prove devastating to Philip 186 00:12:29,880 --> 00:12:32,400 Speaker 3: Morse and r JA Rentals back in the nineteen nineties. 187 00:12:32,480 --> 00:12:38,040 Speaker 3: But unlike other theories, this one has some documented evidentiary 188 00:12:38,080 --> 00:12:42,640 Speaker 3: support because there are some internal exceon documents that have 189 00:12:42,720 --> 00:12:45,600 Speaker 3: been widely reported to the public to show the company 190 00:12:45,720 --> 00:12:50,440 Speaker 3: understood climate change risks earlier than it publicly acknowledged. But 191 00:12:50,800 --> 00:12:55,719 Speaker 3: again direct cause a link, I don't find it. Then 192 00:12:55,760 --> 00:12:58,920 Speaker 3: we got consumer protections because of course you know we 193 00:12:59,000 --> 00:13:02,080 Speaker 3: got it? Where do we just with our consumers? So 194 00:13:02,240 --> 00:13:06,480 Speaker 3: boulders alleging that there are violations of Colorado's consumer protection statutes, 195 00:13:07,120 --> 00:13:11,000 Speaker 3: and that's based on the idea that building gas companies 196 00:13:11,320 --> 00:13:17,480 Speaker 3: engaged in deceptive marketing and misrepresentation about their product's environmental impact. 197 00:13:18,280 --> 00:13:20,800 Speaker 3: But I read that when I thought to myself, next 198 00:13:20,800 --> 00:13:22,959 Speaker 3: time you go to Sam's or Costco or anywhere to 199 00:13:23,000 --> 00:13:25,720 Speaker 3: get gas, go look at all the regulations up there. 200 00:13:26,120 --> 00:13:28,560 Speaker 3: There will be somewhere near the pump everything that you 201 00:13:28,600 --> 00:13:30,400 Speaker 3: can and cannot do. As you put gas in the car, 202 00:13:31,240 --> 00:13:33,280 Speaker 3: you know, don't breathe the fumes, don't put it in 203 00:13:33,360 --> 00:13:35,800 Speaker 3: a gas can, don't let kids do it. It's dangerous, 204 00:13:35,800 --> 00:13:37,400 Speaker 3: it's awful. You know it's gonna blow up and tell 205 00:13:37,400 --> 00:13:42,600 Speaker 3: you it's it's horrible. How How are they engaged in 206 00:13:42,640 --> 00:13:48,920 Speaker 3: deceptive marketing or lying about the environmental impact. But here's 207 00:13:48,960 --> 00:13:53,679 Speaker 3: the central question and the one that has I think 208 00:13:54,679 --> 00:14:01,520 Speaker 3: the most fundamental constitutional architecture that the Court will address, 209 00:14:02,320 --> 00:14:07,400 Speaker 3: and that's federal preemption. So the supremacy clause. We've talked 210 00:14:07,400 --> 00:14:10,360 Speaker 3: about the supremacy clause before. The supremacy clause in the 211 00:14:10,440 --> 00:14:15,040 Speaker 3: US Constitution establishes that federal law is the supreme law 212 00:14:15,120 --> 00:14:18,520 Speaker 3: of the land. So when Congress enacts a law, a 213 00:14:18,559 --> 00:14:23,040 Speaker 3: statute that occupies takes up an entire field of regulation. 214 00:14:24,120 --> 00:14:28,760 Speaker 3: Or alternatively, if state law conflicts with federal law, the 215 00:14:28,840 --> 00:14:30,520 Speaker 3: state law has to give way to. 216 00:14:30,440 --> 00:14:31,240 Speaker 1: The federal law. 217 00:14:32,240 --> 00:14:36,000 Speaker 3: Example, the Clean Air Acts of nineteen seventy but all 218 00:14:36,040 --> 00:14:40,440 Speaker 3: the amendments since then, that's the primary federal statue governing 219 00:14:40,480 --> 00:14:45,400 Speaker 3: air pollution, including I might add the greenhouse gas emissions 220 00:14:45,600 --> 00:14:48,480 Speaker 3: that Boulder and Boulder County are suing over. So the 221 00:14:48,520 --> 00:14:50,640 Speaker 3: Supreme Court held back in a caase in two thousand 222 00:14:50,640 --> 00:14:55,640 Speaker 3: and seven Massachusetts versus EPA, that the EPA is the organization, 223 00:14:55,760 --> 00:14:59,600 Speaker 3: the agency with the authority to regulate greenhouse gases under 224 00:14:59,600 --> 00:15:02,000 Speaker 3: the Clean Air Act, and the Court held that the 225 00:15:02,040 --> 00:15:06,400 Speaker 3: Clean Air Act displaced federal common law nuisance claims that 226 00:15:06,640 --> 00:15:10,840 Speaker 3: might come from carbon emissions, which means, in layman's terms, 227 00:15:11,280 --> 00:15:14,520 Speaker 3: you can't sue under federal common law for climate damages, 228 00:15:14,680 --> 00:15:18,120 Speaker 3: which is exactly what they're doing here. Now, there's one 229 00:15:18,280 --> 00:15:23,280 Speaker 3: unresolved question, and I think it's critical, and that's the 230 00:15:23,360 --> 00:15:26,320 Speaker 3: one going to the Supreme Court is whether the Clean 231 00:15:26,400 --> 00:15:30,920 Speaker 3: Air Act also displaces state common law claims. 232 00:15:31,760 --> 00:15:34,520 Speaker 1: Here's what the oil companies argue. Yes, it does. 233 00:15:35,000 --> 00:15:40,320 Speaker 3: Because greenhouse gas emissions are inherently interstate, and they're even 234 00:15:40,400 --> 00:15:46,320 Speaker 3: international in nature, they cannot be meaningfully regulated by a state, 235 00:15:46,880 --> 00:15:51,520 Speaker 3: or by a county, or even by a city. Congress 236 00:15:51,600 --> 00:15:55,640 Speaker 3: chose to address that issue through federal law, and therefore 237 00:15:55,760 --> 00:16:00,520 Speaker 3: they have excluded all state local municipal law that wants 238 00:16:00,600 --> 00:16:04,480 Speaker 3: to regulate the same thing. There's no room for fifty 239 00:16:04,560 --> 00:16:08,320 Speaker 3: different I'm sorry, fifty seven different states to impose their 240 00:16:08,360 --> 00:16:13,000 Speaker 3: own patchwork of liability standards on what is a truly 241 00:16:13,120 --> 00:16:19,359 Speaker 3: global industry. Comp Administration put it real boldly. Comp Administration 242 00:16:19,480 --> 00:16:23,520 Speaker 3: said that if Boulder wins, that means every locality in the 243 00:16:23,640 --> 00:16:28,680 Speaker 3: country could sue essentially anyone in the world for contributing 244 00:16:28,760 --> 00:16:31,840 Speaker 3: to global climate change. 245 00:16:32,120 --> 00:16:32,520 Speaker 2: That's it. 246 00:16:33,760 --> 00:16:38,200 Speaker 3: They're exactly right. That's the crux of the case right there. 247 00:16:38,880 --> 00:16:43,120 Speaker 3: If this case is allowed, if the Supreme Court upholds 248 00:16:43,440 --> 00:16:47,040 Speaker 3: that Boulder County can sue, that opens the door to 249 00:16:47,360 --> 00:16:52,720 Speaker 3: every little piss ant state, every little piss ant county, 250 00:16:52,800 --> 00:16:57,520 Speaker 3: every little pissout municipality, every little pissout local district of 251 00:16:57,640 --> 00:17:01,560 Speaker 3: suing anybody in the world because here contributed climate change 252 00:17:01,800 --> 00:17:04,480 Speaker 3: over in Malaysia and it came over to Boulder and 253 00:17:04,520 --> 00:17:04,879 Speaker 3: hurt us. 254 00:17:04,880 --> 00:17:08,200 Speaker 1: So we're going to sue you. Now. 255 00:17:08,280 --> 00:17:11,600 Speaker 3: Boulder wants to argue that the Clean Air Act never 256 00:17:11,680 --> 00:17:15,879 Speaker 3: intended to give polluters, the oil and gas companies immunity 257 00:17:15,920 --> 00:17:20,360 Speaker 3: from state tort liability, and that the states have traditionally 258 00:17:20,400 --> 00:17:24,679 Speaker 3: exercised police power to compensate residents for property damage. And 259 00:17:24,720 --> 00:17:27,040 Speaker 3: they claim that there's nothing the Clean Air Act that 260 00:17:27,280 --> 00:17:31,320 Speaker 3: Barr's state tortue claims, So they invoke what is truly 261 00:17:31,359 --> 00:17:35,080 Speaker 3: a well established presumption against preemption. Courts are supposed to 262 00:17:35,160 --> 00:17:39,119 Speaker 3: assume that Congress didn't intend to displace state law unless 263 00:17:39,119 --> 00:17:43,000 Speaker 3: it's said so clearly. That's what the Colorado Supreme Court 264 00:17:43,119 --> 00:17:47,040 Speaker 3: majority bought, and that's what Justice and Moore's dissent. 265 00:17:46,840 --> 00:17:51,159 Speaker 1: Did not buy. Now here's the moment. 266 00:17:52,400 --> 00:17:55,919 Speaker 3: That should make every Boulder County commissioner sit up straight, 267 00:17:56,840 --> 00:17:59,720 Speaker 3: because when the Supreme Court granted cert to hear the case, 268 00:18:00,160 --> 00:18:04,000 Speaker 3: to hear the case yesterday, it did not just accept 269 00:18:04,000 --> 00:18:09,280 Speaker 3: the question that some corps presented about preemption. Does the 270 00:18:09,320 --> 00:18:12,159 Speaker 3: Clean Air Act push out any of these kinds of lawsuits? 271 00:18:13,359 --> 00:18:19,800 Speaker 3: The Court added its own question whether the Supreme Court 272 00:18:19,960 --> 00:18:25,959 Speaker 3: has statutory and Article three jurisdiction to even hear the case. 273 00:18:27,000 --> 00:18:30,080 Speaker 3: Now that may sound like a technicality, but it is not. 274 00:18:31,400 --> 00:18:36,280 Speaker 3: Article three jurisdiction refers to the constitutional limits on federal 275 00:18:36,680 --> 00:18:40,560 Speaker 3: judicial power, and the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to review state 276 00:18:40,600 --> 00:18:45,320 Speaker 3: court decisions is generally limited to questions of federal law. 277 00:18:46,160 --> 00:18:51,520 Speaker 3: So if the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling was entirely a 278 00:18:51,560 --> 00:18:57,720 Speaker 3: matter of state law, then interpreting Colorado's nuisance trespass and 279 00:18:57,800 --> 00:19:03,119 Speaker 3: conspiracy laws, the Supreme Court arguably would have nothing to review. 280 00:19:04,240 --> 00:19:07,200 Speaker 3: And that's where it gets really interesting. 281 00:19:07,680 --> 00:19:11,159 Speaker 2: Boulder is always thought about the ecology. When I was 282 00:19:11,200 --> 00:19:16,480 Speaker 2: there in sixty eight and right by Boulder Creek in 283 00:19:16,640 --> 00:19:21,040 Speaker 2: the park, they had their sign warning no waiting or 284 00:19:21,080 --> 00:19:24,200 Speaker 2: bathing infectious hepatitis gonerrhea. 285 00:19:25,160 --> 00:19:26,280 Speaker 1: You know, right? 286 00:19:26,760 --> 00:19:29,960 Speaker 2: I wonder is that sign is still there by the park? 287 00:19:33,040 --> 00:19:37,600 Speaker 1: No bathing in Boulder Creek? Is that what? So? He says, 288 00:19:38,440 --> 00:19:40,919 Speaker 1: I don't. I mean I lived in Boulder for a 289 00:19:40,920 --> 00:19:41,280 Speaker 1: long time. 290 00:19:41,320 --> 00:19:44,119 Speaker 3: I don't remember ever seeing a sign, but no bathing 291 00:19:44,119 --> 00:19:47,320 Speaker 3: in Boulder Creek because you ain't get gonorrhea, you're gonna 292 00:19:47,359 --> 00:19:47,840 Speaker 3: get the VD. 293 00:19:50,600 --> 00:19:51,040 Speaker 2: Wow. 294 00:19:52,960 --> 00:19:56,080 Speaker 1: He probably just rolled with a different crowd. Well, who knows. 295 00:19:56,080 --> 00:19:57,800 Speaker 3: And Boulder you can just walk through Boulder and pick 296 00:19:57,880 --> 00:20:02,120 Speaker 3: up any number of things, so who knows. So we're 297 00:20:02,119 --> 00:20:06,360 Speaker 3: talking about this lawsuit that has made in a nutshell 298 00:20:07,760 --> 00:20:12,280 Speaker 3: Bolder issuing the oil and gas companies for climate change. 299 00:20:12,520 --> 00:20:15,480 Speaker 3: And their prime example is the Marshall fire, and the 300 00:20:15,480 --> 00:20:19,440 Speaker 3: Marshall fire was worse because of climate change, and that's 301 00:20:19,560 --> 00:20:23,000 Speaker 3: costing the taxpayer's money. So they want to be able 302 00:20:23,040 --> 00:20:27,920 Speaker 3: to regulate. I guess Greenhouse gasing missions in the county 303 00:20:28,160 --> 00:20:33,359 Speaker 3: and in the city, which let's just pause from the 304 00:20:33,480 --> 00:20:36,960 Speaker 3: lawsuit for a moment and think about if they were 305 00:20:37,000 --> 00:20:39,679 Speaker 3: to win, which I don't think they will. We'll get 306 00:20:39,720 --> 00:20:42,240 Speaker 3: to that in a minute, but if they were to win, 307 00:20:43,800 --> 00:20:48,879 Speaker 3: and you could at the county, state and local level, 308 00:20:49,760 --> 00:20:55,680 Speaker 3: you could regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Think of the regulatory 309 00:20:56,760 --> 00:21:01,760 Speaker 3: tsunami that a place like Boulder would put on oil 310 00:21:01,760 --> 00:21:07,200 Speaker 3: and gas companies or for that matter, Excel Energy or 311 00:21:07,240 --> 00:21:11,200 Speaker 3: whoever their natural gas b doesn't make it, whoever they're electric, 312 00:21:11,520 --> 00:21:19,320 Speaker 3: and whoever their generation provider is for electricity or natural 313 00:21:19,359 --> 00:21:26,320 Speaker 3: gas or both. Cross Wood Skyrocket beyond the point of 314 00:21:26,359 --> 00:21:30,080 Speaker 3: where anybody could afford it. Nobody could afford it, and 315 00:21:30,160 --> 00:21:33,879 Speaker 3: quite frankly, people would have to probably pollute even more. 316 00:21:34,240 --> 00:21:37,680 Speaker 3: Assuming you could even get a internal you know they 317 00:21:37,720 --> 00:21:41,199 Speaker 3: probably do this. I can see blazing saddles, like have 318 00:21:41,240 --> 00:21:43,840 Speaker 3: a toll gate. If you want to drive your internal 319 00:21:43,840 --> 00:21:49,399 Speaker 3: combustion engine car as you cross over Davidson Hill and 320 00:21:49,440 --> 00:21:51,680 Speaker 3: you're going down thirty six into Boulder, you'd have to 321 00:21:51,680 --> 00:21:53,040 Speaker 3: stop at the top of the hill or wherever the 322 00:21:53,040 --> 00:21:56,119 Speaker 3: county line is, and you have to pay a toll 323 00:21:56,320 --> 00:22:00,080 Speaker 3: to drive your internal combustion engine into Boulder, because of 324 00:22:00,119 --> 00:22:03,600 Speaker 3: course that would offset the greenhouse gassing missions, which we 325 00:22:03,680 --> 00:22:06,280 Speaker 3: know it would not do, because what they would do 326 00:22:06,320 --> 00:22:08,000 Speaker 3: is they take that money and put into some stupid, 327 00:22:08,040 --> 00:22:11,159 Speaker 3: preat deal, dumbass projects somewhere and some NGO would make 328 00:22:11,240 --> 00:22:13,640 Speaker 3: millions of dollars off of it and nothing would ever change. 329 00:22:15,200 --> 00:22:18,960 Speaker 3: Or they might just you know, outlaw internal combustion engines altogether, 330 00:22:19,840 --> 00:22:21,960 Speaker 3: or you'd have to have you could only heat and 331 00:22:22,040 --> 00:22:26,920 Speaker 3: cool your home with solar and wind. Yeah, or maybe 332 00:22:27,000 --> 00:22:32,560 Speaker 3: just maybe only nuclear power to generate electricity. So maybe 333 00:22:32,600 --> 00:22:34,600 Speaker 3: on top of Davidson Hill they could build a gigantic 334 00:22:34,680 --> 00:22:35,480 Speaker 3: nuclear power plant. 335 00:22:35,520 --> 00:22:36,600 Speaker 1: Wouldn't that be fantastic? 336 00:22:37,960 --> 00:22:43,520 Speaker 3: These people are nuts, absolutely nuts, But this is what 337 00:22:43,560 --> 00:22:48,679 Speaker 3: we expect from the People's Republic. As I said, the 338 00:22:49,240 --> 00:22:55,919 Speaker 3: jurisdiction issue is the wild card in this case. The 339 00:22:56,000 --> 00:22:59,359 Speaker 3: court adding a question about whether or not they even 340 00:22:59,520 --> 00:23:03,400 Speaker 3: have statutory Article three jurisdiction to hear the case at 341 00:23:03,400 --> 00:23:09,600 Speaker 3: all is something that well is it's fundamental. It's a 342 00:23:09,600 --> 00:23:14,040 Speaker 3: fundamental issue about federal questions interstate commerce, foreign affairs, energy policy, 343 00:23:14,960 --> 00:23:18,040 Speaker 3: and I believe those long in federal court regardless how 344 00:23:18,080 --> 00:23:21,200 Speaker 3: you set up the pleadings or the court could be 345 00:23:21,240 --> 00:23:26,040 Speaker 3: asking a genuine procedural question, a genuine jurisdictional question that, 346 00:23:26,119 --> 00:23:29,040 Speaker 3: if resolved adversely to the oil companies, would send the 347 00:23:29,080 --> 00:23:32,359 Speaker 3: case back down with no resolution the preemption question. And 348 00:23:32,440 --> 00:23:35,919 Speaker 3: that would mean that it could proceed on all of 349 00:23:35,920 --> 00:23:40,000 Speaker 3: those issues of trespass. And you know what, I outline 350 00:23:40,000 --> 00:23:44,400 Speaker 3: them all this you got hang on, we're on my notes. 351 00:23:45,920 --> 00:23:53,960 Speaker 3: Nuisance trespass, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy, consumer protection violations. 352 00:23:54,000 --> 00:23:54,920 Speaker 1: All of those. 353 00:23:54,720 --> 00:23:57,600 Speaker 3: Would then be in the hands of are you ready 354 00:23:58,160 --> 00:24:01,280 Speaker 3: the Bowler County Commissioners in the City Council of Boulder 355 00:24:01,800 --> 00:24:06,679 Speaker 3: to regulate an energy company that works nationally, it works 356 00:24:06,720 --> 00:24:09,960 Speaker 3: globally internationally. You think they're gonna want to do business 357 00:24:10,000 --> 00:24:12,439 Speaker 3: in Boulder County. Let's go back to the very beginning 358 00:24:12,440 --> 00:24:15,720 Speaker 3: of this program when we talked about affordability and the 359 00:24:15,760 --> 00:24:20,560 Speaker 3: cost of living. Yeah, the Boulder is geographically a very 360 00:24:20,600 --> 00:24:26,280 Speaker 3: desirable place. It's gorgeous in places. If you think it's expensive, 361 00:24:26,359 --> 00:24:29,080 Speaker 3: now wait till you see what it's gonna be like 362 00:24:29,080 --> 00:24:30,280 Speaker 3: if they win this lawsuit. 363 00:24:31,800 --> 00:24:33,480 Speaker 1: So if the case. 364 00:24:33,240 --> 00:24:37,760 Speaker 3: Gets sent back down to well, especially gets sent back 365 00:24:37,800 --> 00:24:39,920 Speaker 3: down to the lower court and says, hey, we don't 366 00:24:40,000 --> 00:24:43,040 Speaker 3: have a jurisdiction. The case is gonna stand, and they 367 00:24:43,040 --> 00:24:45,560 Speaker 3: can proceed to try to prove their damages and try 368 00:24:45,560 --> 00:24:47,280 Speaker 3: to prove all of that, and the next thing, you know, 369 00:24:47,280 --> 00:24:50,320 Speaker 3: there's gonna be some regulatory framework that's gonna cost everybody, 370 00:24:50,440 --> 00:24:52,399 Speaker 3: you know, bazillions of dollars in Boulder's gonna want to 371 00:24:52,400 --> 00:24:59,159 Speaker 3: White's broke. Now, let me be direct, let's read the 372 00:24:59,200 --> 00:25:04,080 Speaker 3: t v's from it. It's really dangerous to predict what 373 00:25:04,200 --> 00:25:07,720 Speaker 3: the courts will do. But I think the constellation of 374 00:25:07,840 --> 00:25:12,760 Speaker 3: facts here in this case points strongly toward a reversal 375 00:25:12,800 --> 00:25:16,600 Speaker 3: of the Colorado Supreme Court. Start with the composition of 376 00:25:16,600 --> 00:25:20,160 Speaker 3: the court. The US Supreme Court. We have six three 377 00:25:20,320 --> 00:25:25,399 Speaker 3: so called conservative supermajority judges justices, and it's a court 378 00:25:25,720 --> 00:25:30,119 Speaker 3: that has been skeptical of expansive federal regulatory power. Remember 379 00:25:30,160 --> 00:25:32,320 Speaker 3: they got rid of the Chevron doctrine. They said, we 380 00:25:32,440 --> 00:25:35,040 Speaker 3: just have to take a face value any regulations that 381 00:25:35,119 --> 00:25:38,200 Speaker 3: these regulatory agencies adopt. They said, no, that's not true. 382 00:25:38,440 --> 00:25:45,040 Speaker 3: Congress has to expressly delegate specific authority to these regulatory agencies. 383 00:25:45,200 --> 00:25:46,560 Speaker 3: And they said, no, we're not gonna put up with 384 00:25:46,560 --> 00:25:53,359 Speaker 3: that anymore. Second, you've got the Trump administration's Friends of 385 00:25:53,359 --> 00:25:55,840 Speaker 3: the Court or amikus support for the old companies. And 386 00:25:55,880 --> 00:25:59,359 Speaker 3: I think that matters because the executive branches position on 387 00:25:59,440 --> 00:26:03,119 Speaker 3: questions of federal preemption is going to carry weight with 388 00:26:03,160 --> 00:26:07,200 Speaker 3: the Court, particularly on issues that touch foreign affairs and 389 00:26:07,400 --> 00:26:11,000 Speaker 3: energy policy. So when the Deputy Solicitor General files are 390 00:26:11,040 --> 00:26:14,160 Speaker 3: brief saying that allowing this suit would be would mean 391 00:26:14,520 --> 00:26:16,720 Speaker 3: and he wrote this that every city in America suit 392 00:26:16,800 --> 00:26:20,840 Speaker 3: essentially anyone in the world, that framing will resonate with 393 00:26:20,960 --> 00:26:25,200 Speaker 3: the majority that cares deeply about separation of powers and 394 00:26:25,280 --> 00:26:29,360 Speaker 3: the limits of judicial interference. And Third, and I think 395 00:26:29,359 --> 00:26:31,600 Speaker 3: this is the legal argument that I personally find the 396 00:26:31,640 --> 00:26:37,320 Speaker 3: most compelling. There's the American Electric Power versus Massachusetts President 397 00:26:37,320 --> 00:26:40,040 Speaker 3: from twenty eleven is doing a lot of work here 398 00:26:40,480 --> 00:26:46,359 Speaker 3: that's just not appreciated. In that case, Justice Ginsburg yes, 399 00:26:47,080 --> 00:26:53,040 Speaker 3: that liberal Justice Ginsburg voted or wrote for the majority 400 00:26:53,080 --> 00:26:58,760 Speaker 3: opinion for the majority a unanimous opinion that the Federal 401 00:26:58,840 --> 00:27:04,360 Speaker 3: Clean Air Act displaces federal common law climate nuisance claims. 402 00:27:04,920 --> 00:27:08,840 Speaker 3: And her argument was because Congress had entrusted the complex 403 00:27:08,960 --> 00:27:13,480 Speaker 3: balancing of the cost benefits of greenhouse gas regulation to 404 00:27:13,640 --> 00:27:17,560 Speaker 3: the EPA, not to the courts. So the question of 405 00:27:17,560 --> 00:27:20,800 Speaker 3: whether that displacement extends to state law, yeah, it was 406 00:27:20,880 --> 00:27:26,000 Speaker 3: left open. But the reasoning of the American Electric Power 407 00:27:26,080 --> 00:27:30,000 Speaker 3: case is difficult to kind of wall off to federal 408 00:27:30,040 --> 00:27:31,320 Speaker 3: common law alone. 409 00:27:32,040 --> 00:27:33,160 Speaker 1: If the concern is. 410 00:27:33,440 --> 00:27:36,920 Speaker 3: That courts are ill suited to make the inherently political 411 00:27:36,920 --> 00:27:42,760 Speaker 3: and technical judgments involving regulating global greenhouse gas emissions. And 412 00:27:42,800 --> 00:27:46,720 Speaker 3: that was explicitly the issue in the American Electric Power case, 413 00:27:47,160 --> 00:27:50,919 Speaker 3: and the issue was addressed by and by a unanimous 414 00:27:50,920 --> 00:27:55,480 Speaker 3: court in an opinion written by Justice Ginberg. That doesn't 415 00:27:55,480 --> 00:27:58,720 Speaker 3: disappear just because the claim was brought under state rather 416 00:27:58,760 --> 00:28:01,840 Speaker 3: than federal law. So I think they're gonna have a 417 00:28:01,920 --> 00:28:06,480 Speaker 3: really difficult time that the three they're taking, Sodomyor and 418 00:28:06,800 --> 00:28:10,800 Speaker 3: Jackson Brown, they're gonna have a really hard time setting 419 00:28:10,800 --> 00:28:15,920 Speaker 3: aside what they're mentor and what their IDOL did saying yeah, 420 00:28:16,320 --> 00:28:20,840 Speaker 3: you know what Clean Air Act that preempted federal law. Well, 421 00:28:20,840 --> 00:28:24,480 Speaker 3: if it preempted federal law, it probably preempted state law. 422 00:28:25,680 --> 00:28:29,240 Speaker 3: If you look at the at the broader pattern of 423 00:28:29,600 --> 00:28:34,760 Speaker 3: similar litigation New Jersey, New York, Maryland, They've all dismissed 424 00:28:34,800 --> 00:28:38,000 Speaker 3: cases like this their supreme courts have the state of 425 00:28:38,040 --> 00:28:41,640 Speaker 3: Hawaii allowed one to proceed, and I think that's why 426 00:28:41,680 --> 00:28:44,600 Speaker 3: the Supreme Court is now ready to resolve a split 427 00:28:44,720 --> 00:28:49,120 Speaker 3: among the circuits and the difference between the state supreme courts. 428 00:28:50,160 --> 00:28:53,560 Speaker 3: The US Supreme Court does not like a patchwork of 429 00:28:53,640 --> 00:28:57,080 Speaker 3: different decisions around the country. And I think lastly, and 430 00:28:57,080 --> 00:29:04,880 Speaker 3: probably the most practically important point, the geographic absurdity of 431 00:29:04,960 --> 00:29:09,240 Speaker 3: Boulder's theory is the strongest argument I think for reversal. 432 00:29:10,560 --> 00:29:15,760 Speaker 3: Sun Cours refinery is in Commerce City. It refines oil 433 00:29:15,800 --> 00:29:20,680 Speaker 3: that was drilled from global sources. The greenhouse gases from 434 00:29:20,760 --> 00:29:26,360 Speaker 3: vehicles burning that fuel disperse into a global atmosphere. The 435 00:29:26,440 --> 00:29:29,240 Speaker 3: climate effects that Bolder claims were injured by that they're 436 00:29:29,280 --> 00:29:33,160 Speaker 3: injured by, are the product of global emissions that had 437 00:29:33,160 --> 00:29:36,760 Speaker 3: been occurring over centuries. For Boulder, saying that carl State 438 00:29:36,840 --> 00:29:39,680 Speaker 3: law governs the liability of a Canadian company for its 439 00:29:39,720 --> 00:29:42,760 Speaker 3: global operations because some of the effects landed in Boulder 440 00:29:42,800 --> 00:29:47,680 Speaker 3: County is a proposition that on its face is absolutely absurd. 441 00:29:48,320 --> 00:29:52,360 Speaker 4: Ah just heard the old cars for kids warms the 442 00:29:52,400 --> 00:29:54,680 Speaker 4: cockles of my earballs. 443 00:29:57,800 --> 00:29:59,360 Speaker 1: Some things are just never going to go away. 444 00:29:59,520 --> 00:30:05,400 Speaker 3: Air ball hoodie who who knows goobers. So there were 445 00:30:05,440 --> 00:30:07,560 Speaker 3: a couple of guys on the Martinez Show sitting out 446 00:30:07,600 --> 00:30:09,240 Speaker 3: there earlier, and I walked mind just said high and 447 00:30:09,280 --> 00:30:11,240 Speaker 3: they go, hey, how you doing, blah blah blah, And 448 00:30:11,240 --> 00:30:14,640 Speaker 3: then they said, we heard that you were instructed not 449 00:30:14,960 --> 00:30:17,600 Speaker 3: to call the audience goobers in Koe. 450 00:30:18,360 --> 00:30:20,200 Speaker 1: So I said, oh, I don't know. 451 00:30:20,800 --> 00:30:23,400 Speaker 3: I said, I think some of the new audience had 452 00:30:23,400 --> 00:30:27,440 Speaker 3: a problem with it, but I was like, good, let's go. 453 00:30:28,120 --> 00:30:30,520 Speaker 3: There're goobers. I think they're finally understanding that it's a 454 00:30:31,320 --> 00:30:32,920 Speaker 3: it's a term of endearment. 455 00:30:33,040 --> 00:30:34,160 Speaker 1: Well it can be. 456 00:30:34,400 --> 00:30:38,000 Speaker 3: Yes, yes, And I tried never to use it pejoratively 457 00:30:38,120 --> 00:30:40,600 Speaker 3: because I want to keep it on the nice side. Yeah, 458 00:30:40,680 --> 00:30:43,680 Speaker 3: we're all goobers. We're all goobers. You're a goober, I'm 459 00:30:43,680 --> 00:30:46,320 Speaker 3: a gooper. I don't want you to let anybody tell 460 00:30:46,360 --> 00:30:49,840 Speaker 3: you this case is just about Boulder, because governments all 461 00:30:49,840 --> 00:30:51,960 Speaker 3: over the country have been trying to get damages in 462 00:30:52,040 --> 00:30:56,680 Speaker 3: the billions of dollars in similar kinds of cases. And 463 00:30:57,360 --> 00:30:59,040 Speaker 3: you know, they argue that, well, we got to have 464 00:30:59,040 --> 00:31:02,840 Speaker 3: it because you know, we have increased wildfires, rising sea levels, 465 00:31:03,120 --> 00:31:05,480 Speaker 3: much more severe stores, all of which we have totally 466 00:31:05,480 --> 00:31:08,840 Speaker 3: debunked on this program and on the weekend program. What 467 00:31:09,000 --> 00:31:15,440 Speaker 3: this is Make note, this is a coordinated national litigation strategy. 468 00:31:15,560 --> 00:31:18,520 Speaker 3: It's modeled on the tobacco settlements of the nineteen nineties, 469 00:31:18,560 --> 00:31:22,920 Speaker 3: but it's completely different from that. It's designed to use 470 00:31:23,000 --> 00:31:26,840 Speaker 3: the torque system to try to accomplish what Congress is 471 00:31:26,880 --> 00:31:33,440 Speaker 3: refusing to do legislatively, and that's to impose financial, massive, 472 00:31:33,480 --> 00:31:37,960 Speaker 3: financial liability on the fossil fuel industry for climate change. 473 00:31:38,840 --> 00:31:41,320 Speaker 3: And NOO is not a conspiracy theory. That is the 474 00:31:41,400 --> 00:31:45,080 Speaker 3: explicit goal of the plaintiffs, and that's the explicit goal 475 00:31:45,240 --> 00:31:49,160 Speaker 3: of all of the environmental organizations behind them. And there 476 00:31:49,240 --> 00:31:53,360 Speaker 3: is nothing inherently wrong with using litigation to pursue policy goals. 477 00:31:53,600 --> 00:32:01,440 Speaker 3: But when those policy goals implicate global atmospheric chemistry, international commerce, 478 00:32:02,280 --> 00:32:04,800 Speaker 3: the energy security of the most powerful country on the 479 00:32:04,800 --> 00:32:08,400 Speaker 3: face of the earth, the question whether a state district 480 00:32:08,480 --> 00:32:10,840 Speaker 3: court in Boulder is the right court to be making 481 00:32:10,880 --> 00:32:14,960 Speaker 3: those determinations is a serious one, and my answer is no, 482 00:32:15,360 --> 00:32:19,880 Speaker 3: you have no freaking business in this case whatsoever Congress 483 00:32:19,880 --> 00:32:23,880 Speaker 3: can set a national energy policy. The EPA can regulate emissions, 484 00:32:24,040 --> 00:32:28,360 Speaker 3: the President can negotiate international agreements. A jury M. Boulder 485 00:32:28,600 --> 00:32:32,520 Speaker 3: cannot and should never be allowed to be the entity 486 00:32:32,800 --> 00:32:36,800 Speaker 3: that decides how much, if anything, Exonmobile or anybody else 487 00:32:36,840 --> 00:32:43,720 Speaker 3: owes humanity for the use of fossil fuels. I think 488 00:32:43,760 --> 00:32:47,040 Speaker 3: the Supreme Court understands that, and I think the question 489 00:32:47,280 --> 00:32:50,280 Speaker 3: is how broadly will they write their ruling and slap 490 00:32:50,360 --> 00:32:55,800 Speaker 3: down Boulder. The bullerspan eight years, tens of millions of 491 00:32:55,800 --> 00:32:58,840 Speaker 3: dollars in taxpayer and outside legal resources, just trying to 492 00:32:58,840 --> 00:33:01,600 Speaker 3: make Exor and sun Court Excellent and Suncore pay. 493 00:33:01,760 --> 00:33:04,120 Speaker 1: Pay for the weather. They're trying to get them to 494 00:33:04,160 --> 00:33:06,280 Speaker 1: pay for the weather. It's gonna be a really nice 495 00:33:06,360 --> 00:33:06,800 Speaker 1: day to date. 496 00:33:07,440 --> 00:33:10,080 Speaker 3: The high it's supposed to be seventy the record of 497 00:33:10,120 --> 00:33:13,080 Speaker 3: seventy one sent way back back in ancient history of 498 00:33:13,160 --> 00:33:17,040 Speaker 3: nineteen ninety five or ninety eight ninety five, way back 499 00:33:17,080 --> 00:33:21,680 Speaker 3: in nineteen ninety five. Yeah, it's all the fault of 500 00:33:21,880 --> 00:33:26,240 Speaker 3: you put a gas in your car or diesel in 501 00:33:26,320 --> 00:33:28,959 Speaker 3: your pick'm up truck. Shame on you.