Jochem writes: "Next up, science will take the stand: Climate scientists and other experts will testify about the serious threat posed by global warming."
Enbridge oil pipeline. (photo: Andrew Francis Wallace/Contributor/Getty Images)
25 April 18
he Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled on Monday that four anti-pipeline activists facing criminal charges have a legit case to argue the “necessity defense” in court. In 2016, two of them turned off valves for Enbridge oil pipelines that transport Canadian oil to the U.S.
The so-called “value turners” will argue that climate change is such a daunting threat that taking illegal action — like trespassing — is necessary when there’s no other recourse. Sometimes, the logic goes, it may be more dangerous to follow the law than to disobey it.
APPEAL DISMISSED! We are GOING TO TRIAL ON THE NECESSITY DEFENSE .
— Emily Johnston (@enjohnston) April 23, 2018
!!!!!!!!!!!!
(I generally think all caps and multiple exclamation points should be illegal. But first, tar sands pipelines should be.)#ClimateTrial#Valveturners pic.twitter.com/XeNuSP4HZJ
The judge approved the valve turners’ request last year to invoke the necessity defense, but the prosecution fought back and appealed. That appeal was just dismissed. Next up, science will take the stand: Climate scientists and other experts will testify about the serious threat posed by global warming.
The necessity defense has worked for climate activists before. Last month, a Massachusetts judge ruled that 13 protesters were not responsible for civil disobedience after they were arrested for sitting in holes dug for a pipeline to block construction.
