Judges use outcomes to interpret the law all the time. There's nothing, on it's face, invalid about that approach. You may personally disagree with it, but then

Judges use outcomes to interpret the law all the time. There's nothing, on it's face, invalid about that approach. You may personally disagree with it, but then you'd have to justify why the rest of us should believe in a legal philosophy that's clearly going to degrade our quality of life by destroying the environment.