EPA’s brief is here. My quick summary of the agency’s argument on appeal is: 1) You can’t sue us; and 2) Even if you could, we can do whatever we want. While that is the standard government agency defense, I doubt that Congress intended for EPA to rig mandatory peer review.
2023.03.31 Young v. EPA Appellee Brief
My PM2.5 webinar from today courtesy of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. The slide show is here. The webinar (with Q&A) is below.
EPA is proposing once again to tighten the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for PM2.5 for the reasons summarized by EPA, below. What is PM2.5 and does it kill people?
Round 2 gets started in the only lawsuit that can derail the Biden EPA’s PM2.5 railroad. Read the opening brief of appellants Stan Young and Tony Cox.
Here’s the Federal Register notice. Here’s a short version of the fraud. Here’s the detailed account of how I uncovered it. The public comment deadline is March 28. The lawsuit that could stop this fraud is on appeal.
The new study the Consumer Product Safety Commission wants to rely on to ban gas stoves is classic junk science.
Continue reading No, new study does not link gas stoves with asthma in children
Coming off a partial trial court loss in September, the CASAC portion of Young v. EPA is being appealed. The question to be determined is: Did Congress authorize EPA to rig statutorily required external scientific peer review with agency grantee-cronies? This case will determine the outcome of the Biden regime’s efforts to backdoor regulate climate emissions through PM2.5 and ozone air quality standards. Stay tuned.
A shocking and disappointing decision in Young v. EPA. My comment: EPA clearly rigged its air quality science peer review with paid-off cronies. Congress never intended to allow EPA to rig scientific peer review when it wrote the Clean Air Act and Federal Advisory Committee Act. Another low for the federal judiciary.
A segment from today’s episode of Outnumbered on FoxNews.com. Readers will recall that JunkScience.com uncovered illegal EPA-funded and UCLA and USC experiments in which ‘researchers’ sprayed diesel exhaust up the noses of children to see what would happen. I would bet that these children were minorities attending some free clinic who were abused by idiotic researchers.
Delivered today. Short and sweet. You can submit your comments here.
Despite that Young v. EPA is pending, the corrupt Biden EPA Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee is recommending that EPA tighten the PM2.5 NAAQS. Read the E&E News report.
EPA released draft letters for CASAC to rubberstamp at meetings upcoming later this month and in early March. Here are the draft CASAC letters on PM2.5 science and policy. The only short-term hope for derailing this railroad of fraud is Young v. EPA, for which we are awaiting a decision at anytime.
