Should the argument of state's rights along with the coal industry get in the way of legislation which many believe would lead to a greater good? As detailed in this recent article in The New York Times, that seems to be exactly what is happening.

President Obama had introduced a regulation to require states to cut back on greenhouse gases. The regulation was part of a U.N. pact on climate change which happened in December. At the urging of 27 states, the Supreme Court temporarily put a halt on the proceedings. According to the article, "the Supreme Court had never before granted a request to halt a regulation before review by a federal appeals court."

This article is a good modern example of some of the topics we've been learning about, including the role of the Supreme Court and state's rights. The decision was made 5-4, with all of the conservative justices supporting the halt and all of the liberal justices against the halt. It seems to be a somewhat historic decision, although short-sighted. The short-term financial interests are impeding long-term environmental interests, as usual.