Massachusetts v. EPA

Dissecting EPA’s Endangerment Repeal: Series Wrap-Up:

Here’s what you need to know to understand the upcoming legal battles.

Yesterday was the last of five Legal Planet posts on EPA’s repeal of the Endangerment Finding, which it based on legal arguments that it has no power to regulate vehicle emissions of greenhouse gases.  The series began with a quick overview of the issues. The remaining posts focus on the reasons that EPA was right to issue the Endangerment Finding in the first place in 2009, the legal precedents supporting the Endangerment Finding. and the impact of the repeal on future climate actions. The bottom line is that EPA was right to issue the Endangerment Finding and wrong to repeal it.

CONTINUE READING

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 READING

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.

CONTINUE READING

Yes, Virginia, There ARE Federal Climate Laws.

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

Contrary to myth, Congress has actually passed laws relating directly to climate change.

It’s a common misconception that Congress has never passed any climate change legislation. But Congresshas passed at least laws regulating two powerful greenhouse gases, as well as a series of other laws stretching back almost forty years. The story begins under President Nixon and extends into the Biden years with the multi-billion dollar Inflation Reduction Act.

CONTINUE READING

State Government Standing and Environmental Law

The Supreme Court seems to be cooling to the idea of empowering state AGs.

Massachusetts v. EPA, the cornerstone climate case, contains an extensive discussion of standing which opens by saying that lawsuits by state governments are entitled to “special solicitude.”  In the last few weeks of its term, the Supreme Court opined repeatedly on state standing. “Special solicitude” seems to be on the wane. Overall, I that might …

CONTINUE READING

Individuals Making a Difference

Two stories of the unknown environmental advocates behind major Supreme Court decisions.

My students often wonder whether they can actually make a difference. I like to tell them the story of Joe Mendelsohn.  Mendelsohn, who worked at a tiny, obscure non-profit, decided that EPA needed to address climate change. His efforts, recounted in a book by Richard Lazarus, led to the Supreme Court’s blockbuster opinion in Massachusetts …

CONTINUE READING

What Does Today’s Decision Holding that Employers Can’t Discriminate Against LGBTQ Employees Have to Do with Climate Change?

The case provides potent ammunition for using the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon pollution

Today’s blockbuster opinion in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia,  holding that employers can’t fire LGBTQ workers under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, may seem far afield from the regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. But its reasoning could have huge implications for climate change action.   In saying that discrimination …

CONTINUE READING

What Does Justice Kennedy’s Retirement Mean for Environmental Protection?

Short Answer: It’s Not Good

The news that Justice Anthony Kennedy is retiring has ramifications for many important areas in constitutional law, including affirmative action, same-sex marriage, and abortion.  His vote was also pivotal in many environmental cases.  Justice Kennedy will almost certainly be replaced by a more conservative justice. If that justice votes with the conservative wing of the …

CONTINUE READING

Climate Policy in the Bay State

With a nudge from its courts, Massachusetts is pushing back against Trump’s climate agenda.

Even in 2006, it was clear that climate change is a serious threat to Massachusetts. That year, in its path-breaking decision on climate change, the Supreme Court gave Massachusetts standing to challenge the Bush Administration’s refusal to regulate greenhouse gases. The basis for standing was impact of sea level rise on the state. It now …

CONTINUE READING

Guest Blogger Gregory Dotson: Is Scott Pruitt Calling for an Amendment to the Clean Air Act?

EPA Administrator Resorts to Misleading Rhetoric in Possible Prelude to Revisiting Massachusetts v. EPA

Since he was confirmed to lead the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency six months ago, Administrator Scott Pruitt has relied on three points when discussing the issue of climate change. He has cast doubt on the science by claiming it’s difficult to know the human role “with precision.” He has questioned the ability of the agency …

CONTINUE READING

Join Our Mailing List

Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.

TRENDING