US EditionShowdown at SCOW: Court takes up voter-approved natural gas protection
- The Washington Supreme Court heard arguments in a case challenging Initiative 2066, which was approved by voters in November 2024 to preserve natural gas as an energy option.
- Opponents argue the measure violates the single-subject rule, while supporters maintain it is constitutional and reflects the voters' intent.
- The Building Industry Association of Washington backs the initiative, claiming it does not violate the rule and that voters understood their choice.
- Greg Lane, Vice President of the Building Industry Association of Washington, expressed optimism for a positive court ruling to affirm the initiative and emphasized its importance for legislative consistency.
12 Articles
12 Articles
Legal fight over natural gas initiative crescendoes at WA Supreme Court
The Washington state Supreme Court building in Olympia. (Photo by Aspen Ford/Washington State Standard)It was more than a year ago when voters approved a ballot measure to protect access to natural gas service in homes and other buildings, undercutting Washington’s efforts to transition away from fossil fuels. The fate of that initiative now rests with the state Supreme Court. The justices heard arguments Thursday morning in a challenge envir…
The Herald Palladium
Showdown at SCOW: Court takes up voter-approved natural gas protection
(The Center Square) - The Washington Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday in a case challenging Initiative 2066, a measure approved by voters in Nov. 2024, to make sure natural gas wasn't phased out as an energy choice.
Washington Supreme Court Reviews Constitutionality of I-2066, Voter-Approved Natural Gas Initiative
OLYMPIA, WA – The Washington Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday in a case challenging Initiative 2066, a measure approved by voters in Nov. 2024, to make sure natural gas wasn’t phased out as an energy choice. The courtroom was packed, with extra seats brought in to accommodate the large interest in the case as opponents urged the justices to throw out the measure for violating the single subject rule, while supporters argued the initiative …
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 50% of the sources lean Right
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
