Litigation
A Rule to Revoke California’s Waiver?
Why an action to revoke the waiver for California’s Advanced Clean Cars program could be the Administration’s worst move yet.
A couple of weeks ago, the New York Times reported that in the midst of growing “disarray” around the rollback of the Obama-era fuel economy and greenhouse gas tailpipe emissions standards, “Mr. Trump went so far as to propose scrapping his own rollback plan and keeping the Obama regulations, while still revoking California’s legal authority …
Continue reading “A Rule to Revoke California’s Waiver?”
CONTINUE READINGClearing the Air
The DC Circuit upholds a major air regulation.
On Friday, the D.C. Circuit decided Murray Energy v. EPA. The court upheld EPA’s health-based 2015 air quality standards for ozone against challenges from industry (rules too strong) and environmental groups (rules too weak). However, it rejected a grandfather clause that prevented the new standards from applying to plants whose permit applications were in-process when …
Continue reading “Clearing the Air”
CONTINUE READINGTrump Administration Attempts to Eviscerate the Endangered Species Act
Rather Than “Improve” ESA, Newly-Adopted Regulations Dramatically Erode Its Historic Protections
The Endangered Species Act, enacted in 1973, has for most of its history been the most controversial and politically-charged of all the foundational environmental laws adopted by Congress in the 1970’s. But despite its contentious history, opponents of the ESA have been unsuccessful in their efforts to weaken the law, either through significant Congressional amendments …
Continue reading “Trump Administration Attempts to Eviscerate the Endangered Species Act”
CONTINUE READINGThe Flight of the Bumblebee
The Trump Administration loses an environmental case. Again.
Last Friday, the Fourth Circuit halted efforts to build a natural gas pipeline because the Administration had done such a lousy job of showing its compliance with the Endangered Species Act. This was one of the Administration’s many losses in court. The case involved a perfect example of “arbitrary and capricious” decision making, to use …
Continue reading “The Flight of the Bumblebee”
CONTINUE READINGEndangered Deference
The Supreme Court’s recent, misguided, Weyerhaeuser decision displays the Court majority’s hostility to agency expertise
Cross-posted from The Regulatory Review In Weyerhaeuser v. US Fish and Wildlife Service, a unanimous Supreme Court, with Justice Gorsuch not participating, indicated that it is not inclined to defer to agency expertise. Judicial power dominates this Court’s approach to administrative law, not just in the context of Chevron deference, and not just within the …
Continue reading “Endangered Deference”
CONTINUE READINGThe Witching Auer
The Supreme Court rules on deference to agency interpretations.
The Court’s opinion in Kisor v. Wilkie was eagerly awaited by administrative law experts. It is one skirmish in the ongoing war over deference to agencies. In this case, the issue was whether to overrule the Auer doctrine, which requires courts to defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own regulations. This doctrine, like …
Continue reading “The Witching Auer”
CONTINUE READINGPublic Lands Watch: Forest Service proposes NEPA regulatory revisions
Forest Service proposes revisions to NEPA regulations to increase exemptions for logging and other projects
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) has long been a lightning rod for debates over public land management. NEPA requires federal agencies to fully analyze and publicly disclose the environmental impacts of proposed major federal actions that significantly affect the environment, including analysis of a reasonable range of alternatives and a response to public comments. …
Continue reading “Public Lands Watch: Forest Service proposes NEPA regulatory revisions”
CONTINUE READINGJustice Gorsuch versus the Administrative State
Does the Gundy decision spell doom for modern government?
Gundy v. United States was a case involving a fairly obscure statute regulating sex offenders, but some have seen it as a harbinger of the destruction of the modern administrative state. In a 4-1-3 split, the Court turned away a constitutional challenge based on a claim that Congress had delegated too much authority to the …
Continue reading “Justice Gorsuch versus the Administrative State”
CONTINUE READINGSupreme Court Takes a Knick Out of Regulatory Takings Law
Justices Curb Ripeness Rule; Open Federal Courts to Takings Litigation
In the final, major environmental law decision of its current Term, the U.S. Supreme Court handed property rights advocates a major victory while repudiating an important regulatory takings precedent the Court had itself fashioned and announced 34 years ago. The case is Knick v. Township of Scott. By a narrow 5-4 vote that split …
Continue reading “Supreme Court Takes a Knick Out of Regulatory Takings Law”
CONTINUE READINGStanding and the Juliana v. United States Plaintiffs
Sympathetic Plaintiffs Also Help Legally
It’s not news that the 21 children (some now adults) who are suing the United States for the right to a safe and stable climate are sympathetic and telegenic. They are the primary reason Juliana v. United States has garnered so much attention, including a lengthy, highly positive segment on 60 Minutes. But the Juliana …
Continue reading “Standing and the Juliana v. United States Plaintiffs”
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
