New Hope for Genetically-Engineered Food Labeling?
Many observers believed that the defeat of California's Proposition 37 at the polls last November spelled a significant--and perhaps fatal--political setback for state and national efforts to require labeling of genetically engineered food products. But two recent articles from the New York Times suggest that the GMO labeling movement is far from dead. Last week the Times reported that Whole Foods Market plans to require labeling of all genetically modified foods sold...
CONTINUE READINGDavid Brooks, Tree-Hugger
David Brooks' column a few days ago makes an interesting case for radical environmentalism -- even if Brooks doesn't see the implications of his argument. Brooks thinks he is writing a paean to Orthodox Jews in Brooklyn: Those of us in secular America live in a culture that takes the supremacy of individual autonomy as a given. Life is a journey. You choose your own path. You can live in the city or the suburbs, be a Wiccan or a biker. For the people who shop at [an go...
CONTINUE READINGMiddle of the First Inning: Big Cola 1, Public Health 0
The NY Times reports that a New York trial court has invalidated New York's rule banning giant-sized sugar soft-drinks. The court's decision can be found here. On a quick read, the decision seems to rest on two grounds: 1. The rule exceeds the powers of the public health board, despite a provision in the New York city charter giving the board broad jurisdiction to protect the health of the city. The court's holding seems to rest on a doctrine created by the ...
CONTINUE READINGReaders: We Need Your Feedback
Dear Readers, We are engaged in an exciting process of redesigning Legal Planet. We would appreciate if you could lend a few minutes of your time to answer 15 simple questions about how you use the blog, what you enjoy, and changes you would like to see going forward. Please complete our short survey here. We look forward to hearing your thoughts about Legal Planet. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, The Legal Planet Team...
CONTINUE READINGLogging, tropical forests, and biodiversity — what we don’t know
Cross-posted at The Berkeley Blog. A new paper in Conservation Biology (subscription required) from researchers at UC Berkeley and elsewhere provides an important reminder that we often don't know as much as we think we do about ecological systems and the effects of human actions on those systems. Lead author Benjamin Ramage and colleagues evaluated all the studies they could find in the peer-reviewed literature for a ten-year period that made claims about the effects o...
CONTINUE READINGOT 2012 and the Environment
This Supreme Court Term features a number of environmental cases. We're now about two-thirds of the way through the Term, so I thought it might be helpful to post a summary of the cases. My impression is that the Court is interested in environmental law to the extent that it seems to impinge on the rights of individual property owners. But the Court doesn't seem take much of an interest in risk regulation or air pollution, despite their importance for the economy and...
CONTINUE READINGThe Sandwich and Urban Pollution Progress in China
The principal-agent problem is a classic issue in modern economics. Consider the case of a Chinese Mayor who must choose whether to enforce regulations on a local steel plant. Pollution would decline if this regulation is enforced but the profits of the firm might fall and this could affect the local economy if the firm fires workers and it could affect the Mayor if the firm is making side payments to the Mayor. In the past, the mayor had private information abo...
CONTINUE READINGWhat IS a Nuisance, Anyway?
If you're a Property teacher, you have probably taught nuisance law. If you are a Land Use teacher, you have probably taught Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, which relies on nuisance law to establishing "inherent limitations on title." More specifically, you have probably taught the Restatement standard for nuisance, which states that an activity is a nuisance if 1) the gravity of the harm exceeds the utility of conduct; or 2) the harm is serious and the def...
CONTINUE READINGTakings, Standing, and Those Nasty Neighbors
Most lawyers reading this page are familiar with Nollan v. Calif. Coastal Comm'n, the 1987 Supreme Court case holding that exactions in exchange for land use permits must show an "essential nexus" between the purported harm generated by the permit and aims of the exaction. (More precisely, Nollan gave heightened scrutiny to finding that nexus.). Whatever one thinks of the holding, it could possibly lead to some perverse outcomes. Here's the hypothetical that I gi...
CONTINUE READINGNinth Circuit takes up NRDC v. Salazar en banc
The Ninth Circuit today issued an order granting rehearing en banc in NRDC v. Salazar, meaning that an 11-member panel will now reconsider the 3-judge panel decision issued last July. (Hat tip: Endangered Species and Wetland Report.) This is very good news, because the (split) panel decision was wrong in important respects. (Full disclosure -- I signed onto an amicus brief in favor of rehearing en banc.) Of course the en banc court won't necessarily reverse, but it will...
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
