Will Global Warming go to the Supreme Court?

Last summer, when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected a lawsuit challenging the EPA's failure to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act, two judges on the court paraded their scientific ignorance. As I've previously shown at length, Judge A. Raymond Randolph as well as Judge David Sentelle displayed a considerable lack of understanding of climate science in their opinions (PDF), with Randolph abusing scientific uncertainty and Sentelle ridiculously suggesting, in order to deny standing, that global warming will affect the entire world in the same way. In a dissenting opinion that was more than three times as long as what Randolph or Sentelle wrote, Judge David Tatel scathingly rebuked the pair--in the process actually demonstrating (surprise) a grasp of climate science. Alas, the D.C. Circuit (with Tatel again dissenting) refused to hear the case en banc by a close 4-3 margin. Now, not ...