Supreme Court
Losing Chevron: What Does It Mean for California?
The Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright will not necessarily impact how California courts review our state agency determinations. But we’ll feel it in other ways.
A question I’ve been getting a lot since the Supreme Court overturned the Chevron doctrine is: “What does this decision mean for California?” Here are three takeaways about how the Golden State is likely—or not—to be impacted at first blush. First, the decision does have the potential to impact California directly in some pending litigation. …
Continue reading “Losing Chevron: What Does It Mean for California?”
CONTINUE READINGGrid Experts Weigh in on EPA’s Good Neighbor Plan for NOx
UCLA Emmett Institute faculty submit amicus brief in Utah v. EPA, a major ozone case, on behalf of some of the nation’s leading grid experts.
Last year, EPA issued a new federal implementation plan to address interstate pollution from nitrous oxides under the Clean Air Act’s Good Neighbor Provision. The Good Neighbor Provision is designed to address interstate pollution: those instances where emissions from upwind states impose harms across state lines, effectively shifting the costs of controlling their pollution to …
Continue reading “Grid Experts Weigh in on EPA’s Good Neighbor Plan for NOx”
CONTINUE READINGThe Supreme Court & Interstate Pollution
It was puzzling that the Court agreed to hear the case. How has it ruled? And why?
Months ago, the Supreme Court agreed to hear an “emergency” request to stay EPA’s new rule regulating interstate air pollution. Like most observers, I was puzzled that the Court was bothering with the case before the D.C. Circuit even had a chance to consider the merits of the challenges. Months later, the Court has finally …
Continue reading “The Supreme Court & Interstate Pollution”
CONTINUE READINGHillary Clinton, Climate Change, and the ‘Sliding Doors’ of History
Here’s what could have happened instead of Trump’s crusade against climate action, if Clinton had squeaked out a victory in 2016.
If Hillary Clinton had won, we would be much further along today in the battle to cut carbon emissions and control climate change. Instead, Trump was a climate disaster. The bottom line: Elections do matter. Not just for politicians but for all of us.
CONTINUE READINGBig Oil Runs to the Supreme Court
Oil and gas companies want the justices to take up Honolulu’s climate liability case because this type of litigation is starting to gain strength.
The oil industry and its allies are attempting a full-court press to convince the Supreme Court justices they should shield them from climate liability lawsuits brought by cities and states throughout the U.S—and that they should do so now, before they face any court trials over climate-related damages. This unusual full-court press comes in the …
Continue reading “Big Oil Runs to the Supreme Court”
CONTINUE READINGThe Supreme Court’s Top-10 Environmental Law Decisions
If these decisions had come out differently, environmental law would look very different than it does today.
Here’s what you really need to know about the Supreme Court’s rulings on environmental law — including its recent trend toward weakening environmental protection.
CONTINUE READINGTemporary Takings and the Adaptation Dilemma
Current law penalizes adaptation measures because of the risk of takings liability.
Is it unconstitutional for the government to build a levee that reduces the risk of urban flooding but diverts the water to nearby farmlands? The answer could be yes, unless the government pays for flood easements on the rural lands. But if the government doesn’t build the levee, it faces no liability from the urban …
Continue reading “Temporary Takings and the Adaptation Dilemma”
CONTINUE READINGDon’t Count Your Judicial Vultures Before They Hatch
The conservative Supreme Court majority may turn out as bad as we fear. Or maybe not.
It’s not hard to imagine the conservative super-majority pursuing its campaign against regulatory agencies like vultures picking over the bones of environmental law. That’s certainly possible – vulture eggs do, after all, generally hatch into vultures. But it’s not by any means a done deal. There are multiple pathways the Court could take – none …
Continue reading “Don’t Count Your Judicial Vultures Before They Hatch”
CONTINUE READINGInterstate Pollution and the Supreme Court’s “Shadow Docket”
The Court considers whether to stay an EPA plan in light of changed circumstances.
Later this month, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument about whether to stay a plan issued by EPA to limit upwind states from creating ozone pollution that impacts other states. As I wrote before the Court decided to hear the arguments, the issues here seem less than earthshaking, and for that matter, less than …
Continue reading “Interstate Pollution and the Supreme Court’s “Shadow Docket””
CONTINUE READINGPower Play: The Effects of Overruling Chevron
Who will win and who will lose if Chevron is overruled?
Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments about whether to overrule the Chevron doctrine. That doctrine allows administrative agencies that implement statutes to resolve ambiguities in those statutes. Overruling the doctrine would shift that power to courts. Institutionally, then, judges would be the big winners, with more sway over how laws are implemented. …
Continue reading “Power Play: The Effects of Overruling Chevron”
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
