According to this article Global Warming Alarmists are going to try to convince courts via law suits, that individual companies are now responsible for... Hurricane Katrina, global warming...etc...

FOX news report

Global Warming Advocates Threaten Blizzard of Lawsuits

Environmentalists, unable to squeeze "cap and trade" rules through the U.S. Senate, have a new strategy for combating what they believe is man-made global warming:... They're going to sue.

They're revving up their briefs and getting ready to shop for judges who will be sympathetic to their novel claim that the companies they believe contribute to global warming are a "public nuisance."

The environmentalists allege that individual companies are responsible for climate change because they have emitted greenhouse gases during the course of their operations. Those gases, they say, have "harmed" them by fostering Hurricane Katrina, eroding the shorelines of America's coasts and causing global warming....

There currently are three lawsuits in different parts of the U.S. pushing this agenda, and more cases could be filed soon. Environmental law experts say one of the cases may make it to the U.S. Supreme Court in the coming years:

-- Connecticut v. AEP. Plaintiffs sued electric power producers to cap and then reduce their carbon emissions. Public nuisance tort law suit.

-- Corner v. Murphy Oil. Plaintiffs sued oil company, blaming the energy producer for causing Hurricane Katrina. Plaintiffs are seeking damages for the hurricane.

-- Kivalina v. Exxon. Alaska natives sued oil companies and power companies and coal company alleging that greenhouse gases they emit contribute to global warming and threaten their existence.

Some lawyers objects strongly to this line of attack. Richard O. Faulk, chairman of the litigation department at Gardere Wynne Sewell, objects to the legal tack and is filing a court brief in the Corner v. Murphy Oil case....

Faulk said that there are no standards for judges to discern a company's "contribution" to global warming. "There is no rational way to determine whether any particular defendant's contribution was sufficiently substantial for anyone's particular harm," he said.....

As Mr. Faulk states... there is no "rational way" to make these claims... in other words... these alarmist lawyers are going to try to confiscate money from individual American companies in the name of global warming.

And they wonder why lawyers have a bad reputation?

xtnyoda, shalomed