Barack Obama loses drilling moratorium appeal
Barack Obama hasn’t done much, if anything, about the oil that is spilling into the Gulf other than using the spill for political reasons to push his cap and trade agenda. Part of this included a six month moratorium on all oil drilling in the Gulf.
A federal judge overturned the moratorium last month stating that not only did the Obama regime not prove that all oil companies– even those that have done nothing wrong– deserved to be shut down, but that the Obama regime also mislead the American people.
The Obama regime quickly reinstated the moratorium while they filed an emergency appeal of the judge’s decision. Just a short time ago the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the Obama regime’s request that the moratorium be reinstated while the appeals process was carried out, claiming that Barack Obama did not prove “a likelihood of irreparable injury if the stay is not granted.” In other words, while the recent court decision is being challenged by the Obama regime, drilling will be allowed to continue.
However, Ken Salazar plans on issuing yet another ban on drilling in the Gulf in wake of this court ruling. The reason that the founders set up a system of government that had three branches with delineated powers was precisely for reasons like this, to prohibit one branch– and the president in particular– from having too much power, yet Barack Obama is doing all that he can to step up above the other branches and assume power that is not his. The sooner that Barack Obama learns the difference between being a president and being a king the better off the American people will be.
America's Watchtower 
Interesting turn of events, Steve. The Obama administration seems ready and willing to continue throwing bans until they find one that will stick. What they are basically doing is applying what happened to cause the BP oil spill to every other oil rig in the Gulf. It should be clear that a blanket accusation such as this is against the rule of law.
LikeLike
You touched on a great point Larry. Barack Obama is trying to punish companies that did nothing wrong with the moratorium. Why should they suffer because of what BP did?
LikeLike
And I heard today that BPs oil spill is the only spill that has ever occurred out in this area (not including tankers and whatnot). So this is specifically a BP issue not an ‘unsafe oil gathering procedure’ problem.
LikeLike
True, but did you hear Eric Holder say that this isn’t just a BP problem, that there will be others investigated? I don’t like the way this sounds one bit.
LikeLike
So why can’t the oil platforms and the people who work on them go back to work? I mean there has to be a limit to the number or bans they can throw at the wall. Or maybe there is no limit and this is a ploy to keep things in limbo indefinitely. It seems like they are using the system against itself (Saul Alinsky tactic).
LikeLike
I think they are just going to keep delaying this as long as possible. They have a plan, and I think that plan includes using this spill to push cap and trade. The bigger the crisis, the bigger the legislation.
LikeLike
It does seem like there is not much room for anything else but politics in the situation. (Unless you are a shrimper in the gulf, that is). What I see from way oustide the whole thing is that Obama looks bad, and Bobby Jindal is looking pretty good.
LikeLike
But why can’t the states and people just go back to work and ignore the the new bans. Furthermore, why does the government have the right to ban anyone – especially in Alaska on their own soil – from drilling?
LikeLike
Your spin on the Court of Appeals’ order is misleading. The only thing the court did today was to decline the Government’s request to officially “stay” Judge Feldman’s preliminary injunction pending a future hearing on the merits of that preliminary injunction. Therefore, the preliminary injunction against formal enforcement of the moratorium remains in place until the Court of Appeals has had full briefing and argument. However, it is a serious mistake, at the least, and a deliberate misrepresentation, at worst, for your analysis to suggest the Court of Appeals’ decided today to “allo[w]” drilling “to continue” or that it somehow dealt a meaningful or symbolic blow to the Executive. This is because, at the moment, the Court of Appeals acknowledged, there is no deepwater drilling taking place in the Gulf; there is, therefore, nothing to “continue”; and, most important, the Court of Appeals’ order explicitly states that, if the Government can show deepwater drilling IS taking place or WILL take place while this appeal is pending, then the Government may re-apply for a stay. Indeed, the very reason the court formally ruled against the Government on this stay issue today was because it believed the Government had not shown that it was LIKELY that drilling WILL take place absent a stay by the court. In other words, the court ruled the Executive did not NEED the Judiciary’s assistance in stopping deepwater drilling pending appeal of the preliminary injunction because there is no deepwater drilling that is taking place or that likely will take place. This is hardly a rebuke of the Obama administration or an indication that the Court of Appeals believes the moratorium is unlawful; it is more a recognition of the fact that, notwithstanding Judge Feldman’s preliminary injunction, the Executive thus far has accomplished its policy goal of suspending deepwater drilling for a limited amount of time. And the Court of Appeals did nothing today to encourage deepwater drilling pending appeal. Quite the contrary.
LikeLike