«A Proposed Early Priority for the Trump Administration: A Letter to USEPA to Reconsider and Withdraw Its GHG
Endangerment Finding Why Climate / Energy Will Be the Real Test of the Trump Administration»
Not exact matches
Lo and behold, there it was: an epic World Climate Report post from last November 19 with the straightforward title
Why the EPA Should
Find Against
Endangerment.
«
Why I Spend So Much Time and Effort on Climate Skepticism New Research Report on the Validity of Global Average Surface Temperature Data and EPA's GHG
Endangerment Finding»
Also floated was using the White House petition process — by submitting 100,000 signatures, «the administration will issue a statement on
why it isn't reconsidering the
Endangerment Finding.»
Why didn't counsel for EPA explain to the Supreme Court that an
endangerment finding would lead, via a tailpipe rule, to absurd results?
Why didn't EPA's counsel argue that the chain of causality from
endangerment finding to absurd results is evidence Congress did not design or intend for the Clean Air Act to be a framework for greenhouse gas regulation?
«
Why Revoking the EPA GHG
Endangerment Finding Is the Most Urgent Climate Action Needed Reducing CO2 Emissions Is Not a Useful Substitute for Effective Stormwater Management»
It is worth noting that the fact that there is a legitimate argument for
why EPA can't regulate beyond the fence - line is what distinguishes this CPP scenario from, say, any attempt to reverse the
endangerment finding, which would be doomed to failure given that such a reversal must explain how its new analysis is correct.
«Repealing the Climate
Endangerment Finding Is Crucial to Restoring EPA's Integrity
Why Climate Alarmist «Environmentalists» Are the Enemies of Human Civilization and Plants»