Chief Justice Roberts
The Overlooked Precedent Supporting EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases
Even Roberts and Scalia agreed that Mass. v. EPA is the law
An important precedent has been overlooked in the coverage of the Trump EPA’s repeal of the 2009 Endangerment Finding. The 2009 finding relied was based on , in which the Court had held that the Clean Air Act covers air pollution and directed EPA to determine whether greenhouse gases are harmful. One reason to worry about the litigation is that the conservatives Justices all dissented from Massachusetts v. EPA over the repeal. But there’s another equally important precedent: American Electric Power v. Connecticut (AEP). That ruling was joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Scalia, so it may carry more weight.
CONTINUE READINGWhat to Make of Chief Justice Roberts’ Stay of the Juliana Case
It’s only temporary but stay tuned
Last Friday, as Rick Frank previously blogged, Chief Justice Roberts put a temporary halt to the Juliana v. United States trial –the Juliana case was brought by a group of children alleging that the United States has violated the public trust doctrine and various provisions of the US. Constitution in failing to protect them from the ravages …
Continue reading “What to Make of Chief Justice Roberts’ Stay of the Juliana Case”
CONTINUE READINGThe Chief Justice’s “Switch in Time” — Practically Huge But Legally Minimalist
“The switch in time that saved nine” is how one wag described a key vote change by a Justice during the New Deal. The “saved nine” part may or may not apply, but Chief Justice Roberts obviously switched his vote in the healthcare case. I can’t remember a case in which the opinions made this …
Continue reading “The Chief Justice’s “Switch in Time” — Practically Huge But Legally Minimalist”
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
