Supreme Court
NEPA in the Supreme Court (Part IV)
Understanding how causation applies for NEPA reviews.
This functional approach is consistent with Supreme Court precedent, based on the text and purposes of NEPA, and provides workable guidelines for agencies to determine what kinds of effects to examine when conducting environmental reviews. It is the approach the Court should follow when deciding Seven Counties, and when giving guidance to lower courts and agencies about how to apply NEPA.
CONTINUE READINGNEPA in the Supreme Court (Part III)
Our guide to understanding how causation applies for NEPA reviews.
Overall, the Supreme Court has articulated a functional approach that is based on the purposes of NEPA, based on the structure and text of the statute. Today’s post will lay the foundation by discussing NEPA’s purposes and how they differ from those of another area of law often used as an analogy, tort law
CONTINUE READINGNEPA in the Supreme Court (Part II)
Here’s why the Supreme Court should reject radical arguments for limiting environmental impact statements.
Our last post explained the background of the Seven Counties NEPA case, which is currently pending in the Supreme Court. Today, we discuss the radical arguments that have been made in the case and why they should be rejected. NEPA requires that agencies consider the environmental effects of their projects, but the petitioners raise hairsplitting arguments to exclude obvious effects due to technicalities. Pleas for revising the law should be made to Congress, not to the Supreme Court.
CONTINUE READINGNEPA in the Supreme Court (Part I)
A pending case could mean radical retrenchment of a foundational environmental law.
In what could turn out to be another loss for environmental protection in the Supreme Court, the Court is about to decide a major case about the scope of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The case, Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, has important implications for issues such as whether NEPA covers climate change impacts.
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 READINGUnderstanding Loper: A Sheep in Wolves’ Clothing?
The real world effects may be limited. Or they may undercut presidential power, to the surprise of advocates of the unitary executive.
Because there are so many outstanding questions about the Court’s new approach to judicial review, we won’t know its practical impact for some time. Its symbolic impact as an affirmation of conservative ideology is more obvious.
CONTINUE READINGUnderstanding Loper: The Grandfather Clause
Hundreds of past federal cases relied on Chevron. They remain good law.
To cushion the shock of abandoning Chevron, the Supreme Court created a safe harbor for past judicial decisions. This was well-advised. The Court itself applied Chevron at least seventy times, as did thousands of lower court decisions. The key question will be the scope of the grandfather clause. The Court’s discussion began by saying that …
Continue reading “Understanding Loper: The Grandfather Clause”
CONTINUE READINGUnderstanding Loper: The Primacy of Skidmore
A previously obscure 1944 case will now be central to judicial review.
Some commentators have tended to write off Skidmore and assume that judges will ignore agency views after Loper Bright. That is a misreading of the Court’s opinions in Loper and in Skidmore itself.
CONTINUE READINGPlaying fast and loose with reality
How the US Supreme Court’s recent decisions enable greater reliance on “alternative” facts
As the U.S. Supreme Court has moved into an era of second-guessing federal administrative agencies to an extent that we have not seen in 80 years, it has delivered yet another blow to reliance on accurate facts. When I served as an administrative law judge for California’s state utility regulators, my job in each proceeding …
Continue reading “Playing fast and loose with reality”
CONTINUE READINGIs the Sky Falling? Chevron, Loper Bright, and Judicial Deference
Perplexed? Worried? Here’s a guide to a fraught area of law.
If you’re confused about the Supreme Court’s ruling, you’re not alone. Scholars will be discussing the recent ruling for years. It clearly will limit the leeway that agencies have to interpret statutes, meaning less flexibility to deal with new problems. But unlike many commentators, I don’t think the sky is falling. I was teaching environmental …
Continue reading “Is the Sky Falling? Chevron, Loper Bright, and Judicial Deference”
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
