Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.


Lawsuit Alleges EPA ‘Overreaching’ With Global Warming Finding

ATLANTA — Representing 13 U.S. representatives, 17 companies and associations and itself, the Southeastern Legal Foundation (SLF) on Feb. 10 filed a Petition for Judicial Review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, challenging the Endangerment Finding on carbon dioxide emissions issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in December 2009.

All legal documents and filings, as well as scientific background and reports, are available at

“Representing a group of well-informed and concerned Americans, including leaders in Congress who have been intimately involved in climate change issues for more than a decade, SLF has filed this important court action to enforce the rule of law and prevent the unprecedented power grab by the EPA and this Administration,” said Shannon L. Goessling, SLF executive director and chief legal counsel. “The scientific basis for the EPA Endangerment Finding is flawed, based on questionable and potentially fraudulent data, and certainly does not rise to the level of certainty necessary to upend the American economy, toss millions out of work, and which promises little or no climate change benefit over the next half-century.”

In 2009, SLF filed a comprehensive public comment during the public comment period throughout which the EPA allegedly considered powerful scientific information that counters the prevailing IPCC reports on man-made climate change based on carbon dioxide greenhouse gas emissions. Despite thousands of scholarly submissions, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson published the Endangerment Finding in December.

After the public comment period closed, “Climategate” and more recent disclosures presented substantial evidence of data fraud in the very documents, reports and analyses relied on by Administrator Jackson in making the Endangerment Finding, the SLF said. Failure to investigate this new evidence that supports leading credible scientists' observations that “global warming”/climate change is not caused by humans (anthropogenic), but is natural, cyclical, and not as extreme as reported by the IPCC, creates significant legal problems for the EPA’s regulatory effort, it said.