Trump Administration

The SAFE Rule: Sham Acronyms Foul Environment

Some Possible Replacement Phrases for the Trump Administration Rollback

In the original proposal to eviscerate national car standards to reduce carbon pollution, the Trump Administration used a  made-up justification:  lower standards would lead to safer cars.  Hence the Administration originally named the rollback of the standards the “SAFE” Rule.  SAFE stands for “Safer Affordable Fuel Efficient” Vehicle Rule. But the justification was a sham. …

CONTINUE READING

Seven Months to Election Day (and Counting)

You may have forgotten, but the clock is still ticking.

You may not have been focused on this, but there will be a Presidential election seven months from today.  The stakes are enormous for environmental law.  In fact, those stakes can be measured in megatons of carbon.  There’s no question about Trump’s approach to environmental regulation. As of the beginning of this year, ninety-five environmental rollbacks …

CONTINUE READING

A Tearful Trump Rues Climate Denial

Greta Thurnberg Given Free Mar-a-Lago Lifetime Membership

Tears ran down his face as Trump paused in the middle of an unscheduled coronavirus briefing late last night. He turned to reporters saying, “Climate change. It’s a disaster. Who knew? It’s a real disaster. I alone can fix this!” Stunned White House aides attributed the comments to a telephone conversation that evening between Trump …

CONTINUE READING

Court Rejects Trump Administration’s Cap-and-Trade Lawsuit Against California

Federal Government’s Constitutional Challenge to California’s Linked GHG Reduction Plan Fails

Since President Trump took office in early 2017, the State of California has filed over 70 different lawsuits challenging the Trump Administration’s policy initiatives on multiple fronts, including the environment, immigration policy and health care.  Over 40 of California’s lawsuits have targeted the Administration’s efforts to roll back longstanding federal environmental protection, natural resource management …

CONTINUE READING

The Flight From Evidence-Based Regulation

This Administration specializes in arguments for ignoring the evidence.

The Trump Administration’s major deregulatory efforts share a common theme. They assiduously avoid having to rely on scientific or economic evidence. Confronting that evidence is time-consuming and difficult, particularly when it often comes out the other way. Instead, the Administration has come up with clever strategies to shut out the evidence. The effort to repeal …

CONTINUE READING

Presidential Power in a Pandemic

The President does have considerable power, but there are serious limitations.

Now that Trump has belatedly declared a national emergency, what powers does he have to respond to the coronavirus pandemic?  There has been a lot of talk about this on the Internet, some of it off-base. it’s important to get the law straight. For instance, there’s been talk about whether Trump should impose a national …

CONTINUE READING

Does Being Conservative Have to Mean Ignoring Risks?

Florida’s Ron DeSantis doesn’t seem to think so.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis shows that it’s possible to be a staunch conservative and still be honest about the risks of climate change and the coronavirus.

CONTINUE READING

Public Lands Watch: Revisions to NEPA regulations

Trump Administration proposes drastic revisions to regulations that implement bedrock environmental law

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is one of the most important statutes for public lands management in the United States, even though it actually is not specific to public lands. NEPA requires federal agencies to analyze and publicly disclose the significant environmental impacts of proposed agency actions, consider alternatives to those proposals, and seek …

CONTINUE READING

Misunderstanding the Law of Causation

Trump’s NEPA proposal flunks Torts as well as Environmental Science 101.

Last week’s NEPA proposal bars agencies from considering many of the harms their actions will produce, such as climate change. These restrictions profoundly misunderstand the nature of environmental problems and are based on the flimsiest of legal foundations. Specifically, the proposal tells agencies they do not need to consider environmental “effects if they are remote …

CONTINUE READING

Pride Goeth Before a Fall

Trump thinks he can tell courts how to interpret NEPA. He’s wrong.

White House has just released its proposed revisions to the rules about environmental impact statements. The  White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) simply does not have the kind of power that it is trying to arrogate to itself. The proposal is marked by hubris about the government’s ability to control how the courts apply the …

CONTINUE READING

TRENDING