- Dubai Debt Delays Revive Fear of Financial Crisis
- US Markets Bracing for Selloff on Dubai Debt Worries
- Car Insurance Scofflaws Raise Health Reform Doubt Car
- US Dollar Falls to 14-Year Low Against the Yen
- ING Prices Share Issue at Hefty Discount
- UK's Darling to Downgrade 2009 Growth Forecast
- Tommy Hilfiger's Estate in Conn. Sells for $20 Million
- Cheap Robotic Hamsters Are Holiday's Unlikely Craze
- Almunia Set to Take Neelie Kroes' EU Competition Job
- 4 Thanksgiving Week Buys For Your Portfolio: Market Pros
- There's a 'Great Chance' For a Double-Dip Recession: Strategist
- Revenge of the Gangsta Nerds
- Will TCU See The "Flutie Effect?"
- Retail Earnings and Sales to Improve in Q4: Analyst
- Consumers Catching the Holiday Spirit
- It's Beginning To Look A Lot More Riskless
- Crescenzi: Claims Level Suggests End to Job Losses
- Hedge Funds Take Early Lead in Warren Buffett's 'Big Bet'
- Rush starts as holiday shopping season revs up
- Asian stocks fall amid Dubai fears, dollar slump
- In Greenland, warming fuels dream of hidden wealth
- Pirates pitcher digs spikes into farming policy
- ThyssenKrupp confirms steep full-year loss
- Dubai debt crisis raises financial turmoil fears
- Japanese flock to first-ever open budget debate
- Volkswagen to invest $3.5 billion in Brazil
- NY apple growers leaving more fruit on trees
NEW YORK - A federal appeals court ruled Monday that states trying to combat global warming can sue six electric utilities to force them to cut the greenhouse gases emitted by their power plants in 20 states.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan reinstated the lawsuits after a lower court judge tossed out the actions brought in 2004 by eight states, New York City and three land trusts.
The lawsuits had accuse the companies of being among the largest emitters of carbon dioxide in the world and sought to force them to reduce their carbon dioxide emissions.
The appeals court said the lower court judge erred in ruling that the issue was a political one that was not meant to be decided by the courts.
The court said that not every case with political overtones has to be kept out of the courts.
"It is error to equate a political question with a political case," the court wrote. "Given the checks and balances among the three branches of our government, the judiciary can no more usurp executive and legislative prerogatives than it can decline to decide matters within its jurisdiction simply because such matters may have political ramifications."
The appeals court noted that the legislative branch was free to amend the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, and the executive branch can regulate emissions through the Environmental Protection Agency.
It also rejected arguments by the companies that any pollutants must be "poisonous" or "noxious," local in nature and capable of producing immediate harm to be challenged in a lawsuit.
"The touchstone of a common law public nuisance action is that the harm is widespread, unreasonably interfering with a right common to the general public," the court wrote.
The ruling was made by two judges rather than the usual three because the third judge was supposed to be Sonia Sotomayor, who is now a Supreme Court justice.
The states bringing the lawsuit are California, Connecticut, Iowa, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin. New York City and three nonprofit land trusts also are part of the litigation.
The states want the courts to order the companies to reduce carbon dioxide emissions 3 percent annually for 10 years. They say the greenhouse gas is one of the chief causes of global warming. The gas is produced when coal, gasoline and other fossil fuels burn.
The lawsuits seek to force a reduction of carbon dioxide emissions by American Electric Power Co. Inc., Cinergy Co., Southern Co. Inc. of Georgia, Xcel Energy Inc. of Minnesota, and the federal Tennessee Valley Authority.
A lawyer for the companies did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment.
Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said in a statement that the ruling "breathes new life into our fight against greenhouse gas polluters and changes the legal landscape to impose responsibility where it belongs."
He added: "This ruling vindicates our tenacious and tireless battle on behalf of a powerful coalition of states and environmental advocates — a battle that will now have its day in court."
Blumenthal compared the effort with the fight against tobacco companies, saying the states were seeking to save lives and the planet from global warming.
- What you need to know.
- Social enterprises are becoming a new asset class for the ethically-minded.
- Ever wished your cab driver would stop nattering and just get to where you're going? Well that moment is near(er).
- Bill Griffeth is taking a leave of absence from CNBC and Power Lunch for a year. Here's a message from Bill.
- More shoppers than ever plan to comparison-shop this season. Who will benefit?
- It may be the most unusual guide to business you'll read.








