Federal Climate Policy
The Affirmative Case for Finding Endangerment
Despite hairsplitting by the current EPA, finding endangerment is a no-brainer.
or EPA to decide that vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions aren’t harmful is iike NASA deciding that the earth isn’t round after all. Over the next year or two, lawyers will be picking over EPA’s detailed legal arguments. Let’s not get mired in the weeds. It’s crazy that this issue is even being raised.
In 2007, the Supreme Court told EPA to do two things: (1) consider whether GHGs endanger human health and welfare, and (2) if the answer is yes, regulate vehicle emissions of GHGs. That’s exactly what EPA did. Nothing has changed in the meantime.
Hot Take on the Endangerment Repeal
It’s a tweaked version of arguments that the Supreme Court rejected in 2007.
EPA’s argument for repealing the Endangerment Finding is basically a rehash of legal arguments that were rejected by the Supreme Court in 2007. These arguments haven’t improved with age. Notably, EPA doesn’t dare contest the science.
CONTINUE READINGNightmare on Penn Ave (Part 2)
After a year of Trump 2.0, here’s how things stand.
Eight years ago almost to the day, I wrote a post titled, “One Year and Counting.” I was writing at the end of Trump’s first year in office. And here we are again, one year into a second Trump Administration. Trump’s basically deregulatory strategy has remained largely unchanged. But there are some notable differences in the situations then and now. I closed my 2017 post with this: “One characteristic of the Trump Administration is a ceaseless stream of controversies and dramas. But generally speaking, the amount of actual legal change has been much more limited, because the system is designed to provide checks on administrative and legislative action.” It remains to be seen how well those checks will function this time around.
CONTINUE READINGThe Imperious Presidency
Executive Orders by Biden and Trump speak volumes about their perspectives.
It’s not a surprise that Trump has little respect for expertise and immense antagonism toward those he views as his enemies. What’s striking, however, is that way that these attitudes leak into even the most formal government documents, where they shape the official justifications for presidential actions. To borrow a phrase from Justice Scalia, sometimes a wolf comes in sheep’s clothing. But “this wolf comes as a wolf.”
CONTINUE READINGDefunding the Energy Transition
The President Proposes Deep Cuts to Climate and Clean Energy Spending for FY 2026
On May 2nd, the White House released what is generally referred to as a “skinny” budget request outlining priorities for discretionary spending for fiscal year 2026. A full federal budget proposal is expected later this month. The “skinny” budget contains, by the White House’s calculations, $163 billion in non-defense discretionary spending cuts, which it argues …
Continue reading “Defunding the Energy Transition”
CONTINUE READING100 Days of Anti-Environmental Mayhem
A flood of anti-environmental initiatives threatens to undo decades of progress.
the Administration has withheld funding for clean technology, denounced the very idea of environmental justice, and begun a campaign to gut environmental agencies. And that’s only the first hundred days of Trump’s second term.How far Trump gets with this anti-environmental jihad will depend partly on the courts but mostly on politics. Events relating to the economy and provision of basic government services are likely to have as much impact on how things play out than anything specific to the environment.
CONTINUE READINGPresidential Blitzkrieg: Good Tactics, Questionable Strategy
Flooding the zone has short-term benefits but possible long-term costs.
Trump has issued a flood of executive orders. Many of those actions relate to energy and environment, with the general intent of handicapping clean energy and promoting fossil fuels. Flooding the zone has undoubtedly helped him dominate the news and may have stunned opponents. But shirt-ternm success doesn’t always translate into long-term gains.
CONTINUE READINGJoe Biden, Hail and Farewell
His climate actions will resonate far into the future.
Joe Biden is about to vanish from the political scene, but not from the history books. The last election casts a pall on his reputation, as does his unpopularity. But history may be kinder, as it has been for Harry Truman and Jimmy Carter. Beyond all else, he has been our best president yet on climate policy. For our descendants, that will matter a lot more than a couple of years of inflation that impacted their ancestors.
CONTINUE READINGThe Case that Wouldn’t Die
The Juliana plaintiffs make a final effort to resurrect their case.
The district judge contemplates a wide-ranging trial about broad climate and energy policies, after which she would opine on their legality. The Supreme Court will likely think that putting an immense swathe of government policy on trial also violates the separation of powers — especially in a case where they are deeply skeptical of the underlying constitutional claim.
CONTINUE READINGWhy the 2024 House Races Matter So Much for Energy and Climate Policy
Those races get a lot less attention than elections for the Senate, but they’re equally important.
Unified government would give Trump a much freer hand. Republicans are likely to win the Senate. If they also win the House, he wouldn’t have to worry about annoying congressional investigations and could use the Senate reconciliation procedure to gut environmental agencies and federal support for clean energy.
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
The Drain is a roundup of climate and environmental news from Legal Planet delivered to your Inbox once a week.
