Federal appeals court wont stop EPA from using controversial pesticide

[turbinetree]

Source: Think Progress

A federal appeals court on Tuesday threw out an appeal of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) decision not to ban chlorpyrifos, a highly controversial pesticide linked to neurodevelopmental issues.

The ruling follows a motion last month made by environmental and farmworker groups asking the EPA to finalize a ban on chlorpyrifos.

“The panel held that EPA had complied with the panel’s previous orders by issuing a ‘final response to the petition,’” the court order read in part. “The panel further held that the [petitioners’] mandamus motion was premature, and its substantive objections to the EPA’s denial must first be made through the administrative process mandated by statute.”

In 2007, advocacy groups, including the Pesticide Action Network North America and Natural Resources Defense Council, called on the EPA to revoke all food tolerances — the maximum amount of pesticides allowed on a food product — and to halt any legal use of chlorpyrifos. Chlorpyrifos is most commonly used to control pests on crops like almonds, broccoli, and cauliflower.

Read more: https://thinkprogress.org/chlorpyrifos-delay-upheld-6cc940d09379

---

When you read this article, please do not thrown anything at your computer screen, this is just amazing.................on a federal courts double speak.......amazing

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. Over, done. Gone, America. But we will destroy the earth too, that is for sure.

This is tough if you are a patriot.

[The Mouth]

2. Well, with the Rapture coming it doesn't matter, does it?

[bluestarone]

3. all these judges

should be willing to bath in this chemical!

[sinkingfeeling]

4. Kind of ironic that in the post above this Mrs. Gingrich is claiming the US

and 45 want to be "environmental leaders".

[burrowowl]

5. Damn Them!

[mr_lebowski]

6. Very odd headline ... the EPA doesn't 'use' pesticides ...

Should be more like 'Court won't force EPA to ban controversial pesticide' ... that'd be a LOT more accurate.

[Igel]

7. Courts have ruled that Trump's EPA must follow the statute and process.

That's when it comes to repealing or not enforcing regulations.

It can't just decide to end them. It's to have no discretion in this matter--if it can enforce the law as expressed in regulation, it must.

We cheer this.

This ruling says that "we" have to do the same thing. The EPA followed the procedures, as far as the courts are concerned. If "we" want to compel it to do something, "we" must follow the statute and process for doing so.

It's imposing consistency, not just saying, "Well, since it's you asking, of course we'll decide that you can ignore the statutes." Bias in the courts is called "corruption." It's a bad thing, whether it's bias towards causes considered just or those considered unjust. (Notice that that actual decider and considerer in that sentence is omitted because it simply doesn't matter.)