climate change litigation

What’s Wrong with Juliana (and What’s Right?)

The odds against the “children’s case” are bad and getting worse. But there’s a valid insight at its core.

Juliana v. United States, often called the “children’s case,” is an imaginative effort to make the federal government responsible for its role in promoting the production and use of fossil fuels and its failure to control carbon emissions.  They ask the court to “declare the United States’ current environmental policy infringes their fundamental rights, direct the …

CONTINUE READING

Climate Change in the Courts

What’s next in climate change litigation?

There are three important climate lawsuits pending in federal court. Here’s the state of play and what to expect next. In the first case, Oakland and San Francisco sued leading oil companies. They claim that the companies’ production and sale of fossil fuels is a public nuisance under California state law. They seek an abatement …

CONTINUE READING

News Flash: 10th Cir. Rebukes Government Over Coal Leases

Today’s important ruling on standing, public lands, and climate change

In an important ruling this morning, the Tenth Circuit rejected the government’s assertion that it could ignore carbon emissions tied to renewing coal leases. In WildEarth Guardians v. BLM, the court also rejected the mining company’s attack on the standing of environmental groups to raise this claim.The mines in question are in the Powder River …

CONTINUE READING

The ostrich administration

Ostriches actually don’t hide their heads in the sand, but the Trump administration sure wants to

It’s a myth (of course) that ostriches hide their heads in the sand when they’re afraid. Hiding one’s head is about the worst possible way to react to danger: it won’t make a threat go away, but it will make it awfully difficult to respond effectively. Ostriches are not that stupid. (They apparently do sometimes …

CONTINUE READING

Climate Standing with a Twist

Rather than prove they will be specifically harmed by increased carbon emissions, plaintiffs can use other kinds of harm as a basis for climate standing.

Plaintiffs got a Christmas present from the D.C. Circuit in the form of a pathway to prove standing in climate change cases. The Supreme Court has considered two cases dealing with standing to sue based on injuries caused by climate change.  The Court found standing in one case 5-4 and split 4-4 in the second …

CONTINUE READING

Trolling for Anti-Environmental Plaintiffs

A reader sent me a an email from the Coalition of Energy Users trying to find plaintiffs for a challenge to AB 32 implementation.   CEU claims to be a grassroots group that does not have a deep-pocket funding source, and that may be true.  On the other hand, its interests are so precisely aligned with …

CONTINUE READING

The Last Standing Article You’ll Ever Have to Read

Using the Supreme Court’s ruling on public nuisance law and climate change as an example, the essay argues that standing doctrine has become so incoherent and manipulable that it has lost any real function.

CONTINUE READING

The Clean Air Act and Greenhouse Gases: Full Employment Act for Lawyers

For several years now, large law firms have sought work related to climate change, though prior to President Obama’s election the work was relatively thin. Sure there were challenges to California’s legislation to regulate greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from cars; defenses to claims under the National Environmental Policy Act and California Environmental Quality Act; and …

CONTINUE READING

The Environment and the California AG Race

My original plan was to do four posts, each covering a major party candidate for Governor or Senator.  But the California Attorney General race is also significant in environmental terms.  Under Jerry Brown and his predecessor Bill Lockyer, the AG has been a major player on environmental issues — in particular, providing national leadership on …

CONTINUE READING

TRENDING