Man-made climate change – the long-term threat to the global economy and security that serves as the basis for competition for clean energy bills on both sides – is a controversial issue that is still openly debated, and therefore for you, the Supreme Court , nominee Amy Coney Barrett said Wednesday.
Barrett has been pushed for a second day of confirmation hearings, most recently by Senator Kamala Harris, the Democratic vice presidential candidate, and ducked when the Senator identified him as a public health threat in the nature of smoking remains politically controversial .
Recalling the candidate's previous comments, Harris said Barrett had "made it clear" that climate change was controversial and urged the judge again by asking, "Do you think this is happening and that it is affecting the air and the environment? "
Barrett's response made most climate activists ponder what sounded like climate change denial to them in the face of a scientific consensus. Barrett still called the subject the subject of public controversy.
"I will not express an opinion on a matter of public controversy, especially if it is politically controversial."
During the interview the day before, Senator John Kennedy, Republican of Louisiana, also asked the candidate about her thoughts on climate change. Barrett replied, "I've read about climate change. I'm certainly not a scientist. I wouldn't say I have firm views on it."
The left-wing political bloc Climate Power 2020 responded to Barrett's remarks during Tuesday's hearing. “It is disqualifying for a 2020 Supreme Court candidate to refuse to acknowledge that climate change is real. Amy Coney Barret may not be a scientist, but science is not an issue, ”said group executive director Lori Lodes. "The Supreme Court regularly has the final say on clean air, clean water and a clean climate, and we cannot afford any other judiciary that science rejects in interpreting our laws."
"I'm certainly not a scientist. I wouldn't say that I have firm views on [climate change]."
The Trump administration has withdrawn hundreds, sometimes decades, of environmental legislation largely at the behest of fossil fuel lobbyists, citing costs and unequal enforcement – many are reversals of rules that are or could be the subject of lawsuits.
Read: Fracking and the “Green New Deal”: This is where Trump and Biden stand on climate change
Republican lawmakers have developed advanced versions of clean energy bills that favor carbon capture as a means of reducing pollution. They are now driving economically viable solar and wind power into an energy mix that includes natural gas. Democrats have developed their own versions that are more restrictive on fossil fuels.
Opinion: After years of underperformance on the stock exchange, alternative energy is brand new