California’s attempt to implement a cap-and-trade program as part of its comprehensive global warming legislation, AB 32 has hit yet another legal snag. We have previously blogged about the legal challenges facing cap-and-trade here. On Friday, Judge Ernest Goldsmith ruled that the California Air Resources Board had not looked hard enough at alternatives to a cap-and-trade program. Goldsmith in his ruling said that the state must first analyze other alternatives, such as a carbon tax, and explain why the state did not choose them before they can implement a cap-and-trade program. The ruling does not prohibit the state from continuing to develop the cap-and-trade program. It is expected that CARB will appeal the ruling.