This week, Jay Inslee sent out an email praising the victory of “eight courageous kids (who) went to court to compel us adults to take action on climate change.” Our green governor was referring to eight Seattle children who took his state Department of Ecology to court arguing that the state wasn’t doing enough to safeguard their futures by fighting climate change.
A Seattle judge agreed. After promising that the latest draft of his seriously flawed Clean Air Rule would be out this month, here’s what Inslee had to say about it:
“These eight kids know that our state can do more to fight climate change — and I do, too. Their case has been a call for action to no longer ignore our climate and our kids. And now, the court has affirmed that our plan to reduce carbon pollution is the right thing to do, and now is the right time…
“It’s a powerful statement that these kids took legal action to fight for the future of our planet — for their future. I’m grateful that they did. Their generation has so much more at stake when it comes to climate change. That’s why this election is so important.”
Our very green governor appears to forget that the case the “eight kids” won was against Washington State, specifically the state Department of Ecology…. which operates under his authority. Ironically, by praising the outcome of the lawsuit, he is criticizing his own administration.
Additionally, anyone who believes that eight kids are actually behind the lawsuit lives in a world filled only with rainbows and butterflies. The notion that “eight kids” brought the case is a sham. The kids are pawns used by extreme environmentalist lawyers, who make their money suing the government (and taxpayers).
The ruling did not affirm that Inslee’s plan — a.k.a. the Clean Air Rule — is “the right thing to do, and now is the right time.” The decision merely stated that the state should do something not, as Inslee claimed, impose his new carbon rule.
Finally, lest Inslee decide to take a week off to celebrate the ruling (not that he ever works much anyway), it should be noted that the decision will not last long before it is overturned by a court less prone to liberal activism.