SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti-Rooftop Solar Decision

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by hoorayimhelping on Friday January 08, 2016 @08:12AM (#10864581)

>why has the state legislature not immediately begun impeachment?

I was under the impression that impeachment is not a "I didn't get my way, I'm going to remove you from office" card. It's not for validating the whims of the electorate because some of them think they're not being served. It's for bringing official charges to an elected official and putting them on trial. What charges can you file against the governor based on this short article and actually bring to trial?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by jacquesm on Friday January 08, 2016 @08:37AM (#10864700)

I know it isn't but technically it really should be. What use is it to have someone represent you that no longer serves your interests.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by mikeash on Friday January 08, 2016 @08:49AM (#10864756)

I think the "we don't like what you've done" mechanism is a recall election rather than an impeachment. Of course, lots of places don't even have those.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by brockers on Friday January 08, 2016 @11:46AM (#10866174)

Under this same logic the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) would have lead to the impeachment of the President and most of the Democrats in Congress. It was HUGELY unpopular and has only recently become so-so... 5 YEARS after it was passed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by theandrewbailey on Friday January 08, 2016 @08:40AM (#10864716)

I think the best legal action is SolarCity (and others) to sue the State of Nevada over loss of business. Is that possible?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by jerf on Friday January 08, 2016 @08:59AM (#10864826)

You want to create a right to not lose business because of government action? Are you sure about that?

You just entirely destroyed the EPA.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by DannyBee on Friday January 08, 2016 @09:47AM (#10865167)

Actually, such a right exists in some cases, in particular, if it's found to be a taking.

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42635.pdf

Additionally, states generally can't impair existing contracts through legislation due to the contracts clause.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_Clause (mainly because i'm too lazy to write it all up here).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by shpx on Friday January 08, 2016 @09:35AM (#10865084)

Isn't this what the TPP does?

> would allow foreign corporations to sue the United States government for actions that undermine their investment “expectations” and hurt their business

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/business/trans-pacific-par...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by eli on Friday January 08, 2016 @09:21AM (#10864982)

A better argument would be, as the NV consumer advocate asserted, that the way they reduced a previously agreed-upon rate is illegal: http://www.utilitydive.com/news/nevada-regulators-will-consi...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by jerf on Friday January 08, 2016 @09:23AM (#10865002)

To be clear, my point is and was that that is a terrible line of argumentation, not that there are no possible good ones.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by J_Darnley on Friday January 08, 2016 @09:09AM (#10864897)

It already exists: investor state dispute settlement.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by jerf on Friday January 08, 2016 @09:22AM (#10864993)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor-state_dispute_settlem...

While in some sense that corresponds to the words I used (by which I mean, I see why you mention it as relevant), it definitely doesn't come close to applying here, as that is international law.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by J_Darnley on Friday January 08, 2016 @09:37AM (#10865096)

You just need to find the right angle to sue someone. That's probably hard for a company without a billion dollars to spend on lawyers.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by acheron on Friday January 08, 2016 @09:36AM (#10865086)

You just entirely destroyed the EPA.

Yeah, but there's probably bad consequences to it also.

[ Parent | on HN ]

[deleted]

Re:SolarCity Will Eliminate Over 550 Job Due to State’s Anti... by DannyBee on Friday January 08, 2016 @09:48AM (#10865180)

It is in fact, possibly unconstitutional for a state to change laws to impair existing contracts.

[ Parent | on HN ]