public lands
Nightmare 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 READINGCreating Lease Certainty
There are some steps Congress could take to increase certainty for energy leases on federal lands, but there will be tradeoffs.
As my prior two posts noted, there are substantial legal authorities that allow an executive to suspend or cancel leases for energy development. In the case of on-shore leases, that power might be extremely broad. And with an Administration that appears to use its powers to pursue political grudges and to push the envelope on …
Continue reading “Creating Lease Certainty”
CONTINUE READINGCanceling Onshore Leases
The executive may have broad authority to cancel onshore leases, perhaps even without compensation. Congress might want to fix that.
My last post covered the likely power that the Administration has to cancel off-shore leases for wind projects – a power that it probably has, if it was to ever get its act together. But even though the Administration has not yet used it, I think it probably has even broader power to cancel leases …
Continue reading “Canceling Onshore Leases”
CONTINUE READINGCan They Do That?
The feds probably do ultimately have the authority to shut down offshore wind farms – if they ever get their act together.
This week, three different offshore wind projects that were targeted with shutdown orders by the Trump Administration won preliminary injunctions against those orders. Those lawsuits are in response to a blanket order in December from the Trump Administration, issuing stop work orders to all off-shore wind projects in the United States. (For some projects, this …
Continue reading “Can They Do That?”
CONTINUE READINGOn the theory of permitting certainty
It’s a hard problem to solve. There might be lessons from housing and land-use.
What is being called “permitting certainty” is now a central component of any permitting reform that might pass through this Congress. Permitting certainty is the concept of making it harder for the Executive Branch to capriciously revoke permits based on personal grudges, political vendettas, or other factors that Congress does not wish to be the …
Continue reading “On the theory of permitting certainty”
CONTINUE READINGWhat’s So Special About NEPA?
Guest contributors Dinah Bear and Niel Lawrence argue that the National Environmental Policy Act process provides unique and wide-reaching benefits.
Attacks on our federal environmental charter, the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, have escalated from seeking the statute’s truncation to its outright abolition. Increasingly bandied about is the claim that while all well and good when passed in 1969, NEPA is now superfluous because we have a whole series of other laws protecting specific resource and places. This ill-founded contention misses what is unique about NEPA and why we benefit from it, today as much as ever.
NEPA is our one, full-spectrum, nationwide mechanism for getting agencies to use their discretion better. Other, resource-specific,federal environmental laws are prohibitory, setting minimum protective standards as a floor under agency discretion. They provide a basic “thou shalt not” for individual resources and values. NEPA’s focus is on the positive, the field of possibilities, not what agencies have to avoid but rather on how to do best what they can do—over and above those often bare-bones minimums. As applied, if well and conscientiously implemented, NEPA equips and nudges agencies toward decisions that are smart, well-informed, and responsive. In so doing, it confers three critical benefits on the public.
Revoking Monuments?
Recent Justice Department memo on National Monuments argues for Presidential power to eliminate them entirely
National monuments were a major flashpoint for public lands management under the first Trump Administration, which dramatically shrank two national monuments in Utah. I think there was a broad expectation that the second Trump Administration would do the same, but for more monuments (including those designated under the Biden Administration), but so far not much …
Continue reading “Revoking Monuments?”
CONTINUE READINGA Rock and a Hard Place
Reform of hard rock mining law is important to both protect the environment and ensure we have access to critical minerals
One issue that has come up in recent permitting reform proposals, including the Bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus proposal that I discussed recently, is how we regulate mining on federal lands. Much of the minerals production in the United States occurs on federal lands, and that includes much of the critical minerals such as rare earths …
Continue reading “A Rock and a Hard Place”
CONTINUE READINGReconciliation and Public Lands Part 2
Final legislation is narrower than House bill, focused on fossil fuel leasing on federal lands.
As a (belated) follow-up from my post this summer about the House version of the reconciliation bill, here is a summary of the key public lands provisions of the reconciliation bill as finally enacted. In general, the scope of what is covered is substantially less than what was in the House bill, in part because …
Continue reading “Reconciliation and Public Lands Part 2”
CONTINUE READINGTwo more recent NEPA studies
These studies have better methodological approaches, and highlight the ways in which NEPA does (and does not) matter for renewable energy
In a prior blog post, I criticized a recent NEPA study from the Breakthrough Institute for some key methodological limitations. Two more studies of NEPA have since come out from Resources for the Future that I want to highlight because I think they have stronger methodological foundations. There are still important limits on what these …
Continue reading “Two more recent NEPA studies”
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.
