Joel Stronberg

In the melee that marks the 2024 election year, it is easy to lose focus on down-ballot candidates that have as much—perhaps more—influence over US climate policy as the presidential contenders. Who are these influencers? Naturally, they’re the lawyers!

For the US to have any chance of transitioning to a low-carbon economy in anything approximating the next 25 years, it will need to be lifted from the trenches of the culture wars. The US cannot continue to spend equal time at the extremes, believing it will all balance out in the end. It doesn’t.

There’s only one word to describe the results of a new Climate Insights survey of public opinion by researchers at Stanford University and Resources for the Future (RFF)—CONCERNING! The obvious question facing both the climate and clean energy communities is what should be done about it.

The six conservative justices on the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) have once again chosen to ignore decades of precedence—this time in the cases of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo  and Relentless Inc. v. US Department of Commerce. 

Because of the power of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and its subcommittee, Dr. Birol has to keep responding to the invitations and queries. Whatever his responses, however, he’s in for a beating at the hands of the MAGA-minded with future US contributions to the IEA on the line. It’s a fine example of Cardinal Morton’s Fork.

Should Trump re-take the presidency, he’ll have vengeance in his soul and six conservatives on the high court bench. None of this bodes well for the future of US climate policy.