On September 17th, Judge Martin Jenkins, a federal judge in San Francisco, ruled that the courts do not have the authority or the expertise to decide injury lawsuits concerning global warming. The decision dismissed a suit which had been brought against six car companies by the State of California. This is good news for automakers, considering that last week a federal judge in Vermont had endorsed his state's regulations meant to reduce greenhouse gases from cars and light trucks.
In yesterday's case, the state of California claimed that the six car companies produced vehicles which accounted for greater than 20 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in the U.S. and more than 30 percent of those in California. The suit sought billions of dollars in damages, claiming they were a public nuisance. Jenkins wrote that the "plaintiff's claim would require the court to balance the competing interests of reducing global warming emissions and the interests of advancing and preserving economic and industrial development". This week's decision and the earlier Vermont decision suggest that states may address climate change through either the legislative or executive branches, but not through the courts. Jenkins added that for the court to inject "itself into the global warming thicket at this juncture would require an initial policy determination of the type reserved for the political branches of government."