In an ongoing litigation in the Federal Appeals Court in Boston (Docket #23-2078) the EPA admitted that there was no environmental justification for their illegally enriching the oil companies by placing sulfur dioxide on its pollutant list. The EPA knew in 1978 that the Albert Einstein Medical School had proved that sulfur dioxide was totally harmless.
By putting sulfur dioxide on its pollutant list illegally the EPA’s doubled the cost of the diesel fuel that transports all of our goods and doubled the cost of the fuel that is needed to produce our electricity.
Therefore this class action suit is requesting that the Court remedy this illegal enriching of the oil companies by removing sulfur dioxide from the EPA’s list of pollutants.
By granting this request the Court would cut the cost of these fuels in half, saving us, the American consumers, billions of dollars every single day.
The EPA does not dispute placing sulfur dioxide on their pollutant list without any environmental justification and does not dispute the righteousness of the requested remedy.
In this same Appeals Court litigation, the EPA also admitted enriching the oil companies by committing two major crimes in their 2016 litigation with Volkswagen, obstruction of justice and malicious prosecution.
In that 2016 litigation the EPA knew that every diesel car that Volkswagen had sold in the United States was in compliance with their own environmental regulations. There was no cheating and no tampering. The EPA produced fake data in order to convince Volkswagen to confess to a crime that had never been committed. (Fake data is data that would not be acceptable as evidence in the courtroom.)
The EPA’s motive for engaging in these crimes was to prevent diesel cars from being sold in the United States because diesel cars deliver 30% more miles per gallon than their gasoline equivalents. Preventing 30% more miles per gallon is a significant part of EPA’s illegal agenda to enrich the oil companies.
Therefore, the plaintiffs in this class action suit have asked the Court to prohibit the EPA from issuing any regulations or engaging in any activity that would hinder the sale of diesel cars in the United States.
The EPA does not dispute the truthfulness of these criminal accusations nor do they dispute the righteousness of the requested remedy.
