Legal Planet

Losing Chevron: What Does It Mean for California?

The Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright will not necessarily impact how California courts review our state agency determinations. But we’ll feel it in other ways.

A question I’ve been getting a lot since the Supreme Court overturned the Chevron doctrine is: “What does this decision mean for California?” Here are three takeaways about how the Golden State is likely—or not—to be impacted at first blush. First, the decision does have the potential to impact California directly in some pending litigation. For example, there’s a current challenge to EPA’s waiver under the Clean Air Act for the Air Resources Board’s A...

Is Loper v. Raimondo Really the Power Grab Commentators Assume?

The Supreme Court has already grabbed power from agencies through the major questions doctrine.

Headlines about today's decision in Loper v Raimondo overturning the 40 year-old decision in Chevron v NRDC that granted agencies deference in their interpretation of ambiguous statutes focus on the "massive power grab," the decision's "sweeping" nature and call it a "blow" to the administrative state. My view may be idiosyncratic but I don't view the decision as the power grab being portrayed. That power grab has already occurred. The Supreme Court has used a diff...

The Biden-Trump Debate’s Climate Question

“You’ve vowed to end your opponent’s climate initiatives," Trump was asked. "But will you take any action as President to slow the climate crisis?”

The first—and possibly last—debate between President Joe Biden and Donald Trump was never going to be about the existential climate crisis. But the CNN moderators did press the issue in one question. The meandering answer that followed was a microcosm of the whole excruciating affair. I wrote here about 22 possible climate-related questions that CNN’s Dana Bash and Jake Tapper could ask, as well as one question that they should avoid. Thankfully, when Bash...

Grid Experts Weigh in on EPA’s Good Neighbor Plan for NOx

UCLA Emmett Institute faculty submit amicus brief in Utah v. EPA, a major ozone case, on behalf of some of the nation's leading grid experts.

Last year, EPA issued a new federal implementation plan to address interstate pollution from nitrous oxides under the Clean Air Act’s Good Neighbor Provision. The Good Neighbor Provision is designed to address interstate pollution: those instances where emissions from upwind states impose harms across state lines, effectively shifting the costs of controlling their pollution to downwind states. EPA’s 2023 “Good Neighbor Plan” for nitrous oxides is currently t...

The Supreme Court & Interstate Pollution

It was puzzling that the Court agreed to hear the case. How has it ruled? And why?

Months ago, the Supreme Court agreed to hear an “emergency” request to stay EPA’s new rule regulating interstate air pollution. Like most observers, I was puzzled that the Court was bothering with the case before the D.C. Circuit even had a chance to consider the merits of the challenges. Months later, the Court has finally granted the stay., over a strong dissent from Justice Barrett. EPA may be able to fix the problem with this rule very quickly, and the Court'...

The Ten Most Important U.S. Environmental Laws

An image of the U.S. Capitol Building in the evening.

Some of the choices may surprise you.

In choosing the top environmental laws, I wanted to focus on those with the largest impacts on the environment, not just those that are most important to environmental lawyers or best known. My own priorities are public health, climate change, and preservation of biodiversity/ecosystems. I included all laws passed in the U.S., not just federal regulatory laws, and some of my selections may not be what you expected. I've listed the laws in chronological order to avoid t...

The 2023 NEPA Rewrite and the Supreme Court’s New Climate Case

NEPA isn’t a common law subject. What the statute says matters more than pre-2023 judicial opinions.

The Supreme Court agreed yesterday to hear a case about whether environmental impact statements need to address climate change. To read the arguments made about the case, you’d think that this was a common law area where courts establish the rules. But as I discuss in a forthcoming article, recent amendments have put a lot of flesh on the previously barebones law. The. bottom line: The Supreme Court shouldn’t give advocates of narrowing NEPA a victory that they wer...

The Hawai’i Youth Climate Settlement

Thirteen youth plaintiffs secured a court-enforced agreement to decarbonize the state’s transportation system without even setting foot in a courtroom.

At the precise time on Monday, June 24 when 13 young Hawaiians were set to file into a Honolulu court for the start of trial, they instead gathered at the historic Iolani Palace to celebrate with their legal teams and supporters. Their case, Navahine v. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation, was the latest youth climate lawsuit in the spotlight, but on the eve of trial the plaintiffs and the governor announced a legal settlement. Headlines about the settlement h...

Luminosity

The story behind today’s energy efficient lighting and a forgotten episode in the culture wars.

“Attack of the Dim Bulbs” was the title of a Legal Planet post I wrote in 2012. It was prompted by Mitt Romney’s claim that Obama was out to ban “Thomas Edison’s light bulb.” Romney was taking part in what was then a major culture war battle. Conservatives raised the alarm about the threat to the incandescent bulb from a newer technology, the compact florescent light (CFL). A lot has happened since then. An even newer lighting technology has moved in. A...

Is Activism a Part of Responsible Climate Scholarship?

Climate protestors dressed in red stand on steps in Bordeaux, France

Academics needn’t become activists, but I argue that we must support activism. Indeed, inclusive engagement with activism could enhance our scholarship.

Climate activism has diverse expressions. From blowing up pipelines, to throwing orange cornflour on historic monuments. From street protests to writing politicians. In the opinion of some commentators, scientists and scholars should steer clear of all such activities. Some fear alienating publics from science and scholarship. Others suggest that participating in activism reveals a disturbing lack of objectivity. Such arguments against “climate scientists becoming ...

The Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright will not necessarily impact how California courts review our state agency determinations. But we’ll feel it in other ways.

The Supreme Court has already grabbed power from agencies through the major questions doctrine.

“You’ve vowed to end your opponent’s climate initiatives," Trump was asked. "But will you take any action as President to slow the climate crisis?”

UCLA Emmett Institute faculty submit amicus brief in Utah v. EPA, a major ozone case, on behalf of some of the nation's leading grid experts.

It was puzzling that the Court agreed to hear the case. How has it ruled? And why?

Some of the choices may surprise you.

NEPA isn’t a common law subject. What the statute says matters more than pre-2023 judicial opinions.

Thirteen youth plaintiffs secured a court-enforced agreement to decarbonize the state’s transportation system without even setting foot in a courtroom.

The story behind today’s energy efficient lighting and a forgotten episode in the culture wars.

Academics needn’t become activists, but I argue that we must support activism. Indeed, inclusive engagement with activism could enhance our scholarship.

TRENDING

The Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright will not necessarily impact how California courts review our state agency determinations. But we’ll feel it in other ways.

The Supreme Court has already grabbed power from agencies through the major questions doctrine.

“You’ve vowed to end your opponent’s climate initiatives,” Trump was asked. “But will you take any action as President to slow the climate crisis?”

UCLA Emmett Institute faculty submit amicus brief in Utah v. EPA, a major ozone case, on behalf of some of the nation’s leading grid experts.

It was puzzling that the Court agreed to hear the case. How has it ruled? And why?

Some of the choices may surprise you.

NEPA isn’t a common law subject. What the statute says matters more than pre-2023 judicial opinions.

Thirteen youth plaintiffs secured a court-enforced agreement to decarbonize the state’s transportation system without even setting foot in a courtroom.

The story behind today’s energy efficient lighting and a forgotten episode in the culture wars.

Academics needn’t become activists, but I argue that we must support activism. Indeed, inclusive engagement with activism could enhance our scholarship.

New CLEE / Prospect Silicon Valley report outlines top strategies from a series of expert convenings

The UCLA Emmett Institute is tracking California environmental bills. In a year of tough budget choices, here are the notable bills that cleared Sacramento’s first big legislative deadline.

Oil and gas companies want the justices to take up Honolulu’s climate liability case because this type of litigation is starting to gain strength.

San Joaquin Valley Water District Manager Pleads Guilty to Conspiring to Steal Public Water for 20+ Years

Building A Political Firewall Against IRA Repeal

Here are 22 climate-related questions that moderators could ask Biden and Trump in the presidential debates, as well as the one question they should avoid.

Overdue State Water Reform Legislation Likely Be Enacted in 2024–Finally

Here’s what could have happened instead of Trump’s crusade against climate action, if Clinton had squeaked out a victory in 2016.

Thirteen youth plaintiffs say the Aloha State is failing to live up to its ambitious climate goals. Here’s what to watch for as Navahine v. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation goes to trial this month.

The Dodgers are not the only LA sports team sullying their brand by taking oil money. Beloved soccer club LAFC recently renewed a partnership with Chevron.