3: I find Sec. 1402 particularly noxious b/c the idea of "disparate treatment" is pulled from civil rights law, to prevent discrimination of marginalized protected classes. With the permitting deal, Congress is effectively making fossil fuels a "protected class." That's really, really messed up.

Show Post

2.3: In other words, anything a future POTUS does to direct federal agencies to accelerate the buildout of renewables, focus on public health or ecological protection, etc. that could be perceived by a single federal judge as demonstrating a "bias." This is wildly unbounded.

Show Post

1.3: More fundamentally: why shouldn't Fed Govt prioritize limited capacity for renewables > fossil fuels? I mean, we need to actively manage the transition from fossil fuels to renewables to address climate & protect public lands, ecosystems! Sec. 1402 hobbles that power.

Show Post

I wrote for @thenation.com about centrists claiming Big Tech et al had no choice but to partake in Trump corruption because he “had a gun to their head.” Hannah Arendt had a lot to say about individual choice under fascism. What would she make of this claim? www.thenation.com/article/poli...

Show Post

The "build good things" vs. "stop bad things" binary is false for two reasons: 1) We need to do both. The real world is not a trolley problem. 2) Even "good" things have costs/impacts. Enviro review (and regulation generally) is largely about making good things better (and bad things less bad).

Show Post