Commonwealth of Massachusetts, et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA], et al., United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, July 15, 2005 [ruling that the EPA was correct in denying a nonprofit group's petition have it to regulate industrial gases and automobile emission pollutants that contribute to global warming]. Excerpt:
A "determination of endangerment to public health," the court said in Ethyl, "is necessarily a question of policy that is to be based on an assessment of risks and that should not be bound by either the procedural or the substantive rigor proper for questions of fact." Ethyl, 541 F.2d at 24. And as we have held, a reviewing court "will uphold agency conclusions based on policy judgments" "when an agency must resolve issues 'on the frontiers of scientific knowledge.'" Envtl. Def. Fund v. EPA, 598 F.2d 62, 82 (D.C. Cir. 1978).
Read the full text of the opinion here [PDF]. Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here.