|
According to Vermont Attorney General Bill Sorrell, the federaljudge who ruled that the state legislature doesn't have theauthority to shutter the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant tooksome lawmakers' comments out of context. The district court s cherry-picking from the incompletelegislative record for favorable snippets was erroneous, therefore,and should be reversed, the attorney general wrote in a brieffiled with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals Monday. Under federal law, states are not allowed to regulate radiologicalsafety, and in a lengthy opinion, Distric Court Judge J. GarvanMurtha mentioned dozens of references by state lawmakers to safety. The state s brief says this cherry-picking goes againstprecedent set in other cases that say courts should not look for impermissible motives. On Jan. 19, the Vermont judge issued an opinion finding Acts 160and 74 were preempted by federal law since they were passed for thepurposes of regulating radiological safety — an area reservedfor the feds. Since then, both the state and Entergy Corp., the plant s owner,appealed that decision. Although the plant has a valid federallicense its application for a certificate of public good from thestate is pending. The plant was scheduled to shut down March 21 butis currently operating while the state re-licensing process isongoing. Some observers expect the legal wrangling between the state andEntergy may make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Vermont s hot-button issue presents an issue of state s rightsand federal preemption under the Supremacy Clause of theConstitution. Although Act 160 sets forth a non-preempted purpose consistentwith decades of Vermont energy policy, the district courtnevertheless engaged in the pointless and unsatisfactory exercise of attempting to ascertain [the Legislature s] truemotive, which the Supreme Court has rejected, the brief reads. Attorney General Bill Sorrell issued a statement Monday criticizingthe lower court decision for basing its legal analysis on fragmentsfrom the legislative record. Vermonters are proud of our citizen legislature, a place whereall Vermonters are welcome to express their concerns, Sorrell sstatement read. Its open, informal process allows the airing of awide range of views. The district court s approach in this casesets a troubling precedent that could chill legislativeparticipation and debate. The state s brief also argues that the lower court got it wrongwhen it found requiring below-wholesale-market electric ratesto Vermont customers violated the Commerce Clause of the U.S.Constitution. Sorrell has been criticized for not hiring outside counsel when hisoffice took on Entergy s high-powered legal team headed by formerdean of Stanford Law School Kathleen Sullivan. On appeal, Sorrell enlisted an outside Washington, D.C. firmKellog, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel. Vermont Yankee s continued operation has been a prominent issue inthe state since 2005, when the Legislature passed the first of twolaws that would require approval before it could continueoperating. The federal court appeals could take years, especiallyif the case reaches the Supreme Court. The Vermont Public ServiceBoard will hold hearings on the re-licensing proceeding in summer2013, and final briefs for that docket are due Aug. 26, 2013. Briefs for friends of the court in the Second Circuit are dueJune 11. The Second Circuit will likely hear oral arguments in thecase later this year. I am an expert from rfid-smart-cards.com, while we provides the quality product, such as Rfid Smart Tags , NFC Sticker Tag, Rfid Business Cards,and more.
Related Articles -
Rfid Smart Tags, NFC Sticker Tag,
|
