Judge issues devastating ruling on ‘global warming’ activists

By |2016-01-15T21:56:55+00:00January 15th, 2016|Guest Insights|10 Comments

A Washington state judge told environmentalists they could not use “necessity defense” to claim the threat of global warming justified their criminal activity — a huge blow to activists’ hopes they can use global warming as a shield from the law.

Judge Anthony HowardDaily Caller  New Foundation won’t allow environmentalist defendants to make such arguments in their closing statements, according to a tweet from an environmental activist who tried to use this argument in a previous trial. So far, no U.S. judge has allowed eco-activists to use global warming as justification for breaking the law.

Environmentalists claim Howard decided at the “last minute” not to allow activists to use the “necessity defense” argument to justify their trespassing on private property in 2014 to block rail cars carrying crude oil from traveling through Washington state.

The “necessity defense” allows someone to commit a criminal act in a legitimate emergency situation to prevent a greater societal harm from occurring.

Activists argued their actions were “justified and necessary in the fight against climate change, in light of government and corporate complacency.” Environmentalists claimed they felt the harm from global warming was “imminent” and they had “no reasonable legal alternative” to fight against warming.

They also got several “expert witnesses” to testify on their behalf, including a climate scientist who once claimed in 2009 that President Barack Obama only “has four years to save Earth.” Activists also tried to claim railroad company BNSF punished whistleblowers who warned “of dangerous conditions or practices that seriously increase danger to employees and the public.”

Five activists built an 18-foot tripod in front of a parked train carrying crude oil in Everett, Wash., to block it from traversing the state. Activists also carried around a petition for Gov. Jay Inslee asking him to ban oil trains and any projects that would bring more fossil fuels through the state.

“Effort after effort to control climate-twisting fossil fuel pollution has failed, globally, nationally and in my own state,” activist Patrick Mazza said in a statement released in December. “There came a point where I could no longer sit back and wait for the politicians to act.”

All five protesters were arrested and charged with trespassing and blocking a train. As their trial approached, they argued the “necessity defense” to justify their crimes. Howard, however, eventually disagreed.

For months, environmentalists have warned about trains carrying crude oil across the U.S. and derailing in highly populated areas. There were a series of accidents in early 2015 that prompted new federal rail car regulations for trains carrying crude oil, but the increase in rail traffic is because the U.S. is producing much more oil than in the past.

Ironically, oil car derailments would be less of a problem if environmentalists didn’t vehemently oppose pipelines to carry oil and natural gas. While rail is safe, pipelines are safer and don’t cause major accidents when they spill hydrocarbons.

Environmentalists, however, have ramped up their campaign against pipeline construction in the U.S., arguing they cause oil spills and contribute to global warming. The most notorious of these campaigns was the push to stop the Keystone XL pipeline from being built.

Follow Michael on Facebook and Twitter


This article originally appeared at The Daily Caller and appears here by consent.


  1. Don Perrin January 16, 2016 at 2:39 PM

    Just further evidence that leftist Demosocialist climate warmers suffer from mental illness.

  2. Bob Armstrong January 16, 2016 at 4:36 PM

    “climate-twisting” .
    That’s a new one .

  3. David1917 January 16, 2016 at 4:39 PM

    No, they are not ill. If so, they would not be responsible for contracting an illness. I did not say their behavior for which they are always accountable regardless of any supposed illness.

  4. Dayna Hamilton January 16, 2016 at 8:44 PM

    What a shocker, the liberal whiney babies don’t want to take any responsibility for when they break the law!

  5. puhiawa January 17, 2016 at 12:43 PM

    The left would then use for everything, including martial law

  6. Skeptic January 17, 2016 at 2:54 PM

    White Liberals should be worried about their Demographic Demise….

    ….from not getting married and having children and creating families…..

    In fact…….

    …..their Climate Neurotic Anxieties…..

    ….ARE the Projections of their very real Sub/Unconscious Socioeconomic……

    ….and Demographic Angst and Fear……

    White Liberals are Lost……in the Melting Pot and Gender/Race/Ethnicity Wars…..

    I feel sorry for them for I too was a Liberal once…….trying to peacefully fit in…….

    Deluded…..thinking that Liberal Progressive PCism was Synonymous….

    ….with Enlightenment….

    In fact……PC Liberalism is the Opposite of Enlightenment…..

    PC Liberalism is the Death Knell of White Europeans/Americans….

    Buddha didn’t support White Genocide, White Self-Hatred….and Misanthropy…

  7. Barry O'brien January 17, 2016 at 8:19 PM

    Throw em in prison! And toss the key……

    • Sam Pyeatte January 18, 2016 at 4:40 PM

      The Railroad companies have right-of-way rights. If their cargo is legal by Federal standards, they are clear to go. The tanker cars are being upgraded on a Federally approved schedule. I see the 100-car trains rolling through on a nearly daily basis and love every minute of it. They are a sign of prosperity by economic activity. Besides, if we didn’t have the oil trains coming here to our northern refineries, we would have to import gasoline and other refined products at a much greater expense. The far-left, eco-nut Morlocks, are a cancer on our society.

  8. geo brecke January 18, 2016 at 12:15 PM

    If the judge allowed them to prevail, would he also be forfeiting his right to rule?

Comments are closed.