NY Times: ACB Calling ‘Climate Change’ (scam) Controversial Is Controversial Or Something

See, people aren’t allowed to have opinions on political issues, and, climate cultists are kinda concerned that they will lose at the Supreme Court (because they’re arguments are not good and their facts are shoddy)

By Calling Climate Change ‘Controversial,’ Barrett Created Controversy

During two grueling days of questioning over her Supreme Court confirmation, Judge Amy Coney Barrett did her best to avoid controversy. But her efforts to play it safe on the subject of climate change have created perhaps the most tangible backlash of her hearings.

In her responses, the nominee to take the place of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, an environmental stalwart, used language that alarmed some environmentalists and suggested rough going for initiatives to fight climate change, if as expected she wins confirmation and cements a 6-3 conservative majority on the court.

But with Senator Kamala Harris of California, the Democratic candidate for vice president, Judge Barrett, the daughter of an oil executive, went further. She described the settled science of climate change as still in dispute, compared to Ms. Harris’s other examples, including whether smoking causes cancer and the coronavirus is infectious.

“Do you believe that climate change is happening and threatening the air we breathe and the water that we drink?” Ms. Harris asked.

Judge Barrett responded, “You asked me uncontroversial questions, like Covid-19 being infectious or if smoking causes cancer” to solicit “an opinion from me on a very contentious matter of public debate,” climate change.

“I will not do that,” Judge Barrett concluded. “I will not express a view on a matter of public policy, especially one that is politically controversial.”

And that’s where it should be, in the legislative realm, not the justice system. But, Warmists know if they can get courts to rule in their favor they can jam through their agenda. If you make it all the to the end of this barely concealed opinion piece in the “news” section you see

To Carlos Curbelo, a former Republican member of Congress who supports action on climate change, the focus on Judge Barrett’s comments misses a broader point that the courts are not the proper venue for dealing with a problem as vast and complex as climate.

“Because Congress has been so dysfunctional for so many years, now we look to the courts,” Mr. Curbelo, “but we should be far more concerned with lawmakers and their understanding of the issue and willingness to act.”

But, see, climate cultists can’t. Even when the Democrats had full control of the Senate, House, and White House they didn’t push it through. So, they want the courts to rule. They can’t do that with ACB on the Supreme Court, and, also, she’s guilty of Wrongthink.