new orleans federal judge overturns bho's drilling moratorium

Onceler said:
Most people care about people, wildlife & the economy.

You're the only one I know who cares so much about wells.
Click to expand...
Our own energy production is important to our continued security. It is foolish to pretend that people who care about that are *dismissed* to caring about wells.
 
Cypress said:
God damn, I should get a law degree, I would be totally unstoppable.

Everything I said would happen, is happening.




Yeah, I've seen chief executives blow off these preliminary injunctions from some peon judge, using some fancy legal foot work. Governor Terminator is the master at it!

I read the judges ruling too. Or, at least parts of it. It's a pretty weird ruling. I'm not legally informed enough to make a snap judgements on the merit. But, like I said last night, the judge cited the arbitrary and capricious legal standard, and noted the limitation on the court to not substitute it's own opinion for an agency opinion - but to merely rule on whether the agency either violated the law (they didn't), or if the agency finding was arbitrary and capricious. But, then his ruling goes on to apparently substitute his judgement in place of the agency's judgement. Weird. Oh well, what do I know, I'm just an armchair lawyer.


On a holistic level, I'm down with topspin that there must be a way to not make this a blanket moratorium. There probably should be some wiggle room for waivers, and regulatory-based exceptions. Smart ass people work on this shit, so hopefully the new moratorium plan will have some wiggle room. I don't think any of us really know what's in the actual moratorium plan, so I'm not going to get up on a bar stool and shout that I know what the F is going on.

Personally, I'd let chevron, petrobras, and maybe exxonmobil keep drilling, if they can show their safety plans are up to snuff. My experience is that those mother effers know how to drill deep water wells. :clink:
Click to expand...
True. However I think the District Court will side with the previous ruling and this either will go to the SCOTUS or they'll declare they've had enough time, put new regulations into play and move on.

With 60 years of history behind it, drilling in the gulf is relatively safe when the government isn't handing out waivers and giving out awards to BP. I agree that those people know how to drill safely...
 
Damocles said:
Our own energy production is important to our continued security. It is foolish to pretend that people who care about that are *dismissed* to caring about wells.
Click to expand...

His analogy was terrible, and ignored a variety of factors that need to be considered in the cost/benefit on offshore drilling.

If offshore drilling was 25% of our consumption, you might have a better point w/ the above, as well. It isn't.
 
NigelTufnel said:
This is basically what it boils down to: the policy judgment of whether the harms resulting from a spill that no one really knows how to stop are sufficient to justify the potential harms imposed by the moratorium. The judge supplanted his judgment on that question for the judgment of the regulators, which is not the proper role of the judge in this situation.
Click to expand...

I'd listen to that with half an ear if you told me you biked everywhere.:321:
 
NigelTufnel said:
This is basically what it boils down to: the policy judgment of whether the harms resulting from a spill that no one really knows how to stop are sufficient to justify the potential harms imposed by the moratorium. The judge supplanted his judgment on that question for the judgment of the regulators, which is not the proper role of the judge in this situation.
Click to expand...

what a crock. The judge told the feds that the regulatory agency just can't say 'we need to', it has to show some modicum of evidence why it needs to be done. That is exactly the role of that judge.
 
Onceler said:
His analogy was terrible, and ignored a variety of factors that need to be considered in the cost/benefit on offshore drilling.

If offshore drilling was 25% of our consumption, you might have a better point w/ the above, as well. It isn't.
Click to expand...

Jesus, if I hear another libtard talk about numbers and energy I might go postal.

Yes you were the morons saying there's no oil left here, Well Uncle Jed has been busy only he got some dumpass brits to drill his well.

there are at least billions of barrells that dems are holding back because of political football. Moronic
 
SmarterThanYou said:
what a crock. The judge told the feds that the regulatory agency just can't say 'we need to', it has to show some modicum of evidence why it needs to be done. That is exactly the role of that judge.
Click to expand...


Not that I agree with your statement, but you cannot be seriously that there is no evidence of the potential harm. Where the fuck you been the past few months?
 
NigelTufnel said:
Not that I agree with your statement, but you cannot be seriously that there is no evidence of the potential harm. Where the fuck you been the past few months?
Click to expand...

1,000 good deep wells, 1 criminally negligent one

Ban BP your throwing out the baby with the bathwater for your far far left econazi agenda.:clink:
 
NigelTufnel said:
Not that I agree with your statement, but you cannot be seriously that there is no evidence of the potential harm. Where the fuck you been the past few months?
Click to expand...

there is always potential harm. The judge told the feds that they can't knee jerk and punish ALL for the incompetence of ONE, not unless they can provide PROOF that there are many out there that are incompetent. THAT is the role of a judge.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
there is always potential harm. The judge told the feds that they can't knee jerk and punish ALL for the incompetence of ONE, not unless they can provide PROOF that there are many out there that are incompetent. THAT is the role of a judge.
Click to expand...

You misunderstand the role of regulatory agencies and the scope of review of agency decisions.

Where's Yurt when you need him?
 
NigelTufnel said:
You misunderstand the role of regulatory agencies and the scope of review of agency decisions.
Click to expand...
But I do understand the role of the judiciary and it's a little refreshing to see them reassert their role in our constitutional republic. It's been way too long of a time having to watch the courts rubber stamp anything from the feds on their say so alone.
 
Threedee said:
Well, its a matter of whether the companies have the right to keep drilling, or Obama the power to halt them. According to this judge, it appears he was infringing upon their rights. If these companies are smart with PR, they should stop on their own, though...
Click to expand...
PR doesn't pay the bills. Future customers don't pay today's bills either. I see your point, but the losses outweigh the "cost" of bad PR
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top