Litigation
Emissions Trading and the Supreme Court
Advocates of cap-and-trade should find support from the Supreme Court’s opinion in the cross-state pollution case.
In a number of areas, including climate change regulations, a key question is EPA’s power to control compliance costs. A particularly important method is the use of cap-and-trade systems. For instance, there has been considerable discussion of whether EPA could authorize states to use cap-and-trade to control greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, as opposed …
Continue reading “Emissions Trading and the Supreme Court”
CONTINUE READINGJustice Scalia’s Puzzling Dissent
Justice Scalia’s dissent in EME Homer contains a number of unusual lapses in substance and tone.
As I’ve been studying the opinions in EME Homer, I’m increasingly struck by the oddities of Justice Scalia’s dissent. There was a flap last week about his blunder, later quietly corrected, in describing one of his own past opinions. But that’s not the only peculiarity of the dissent. As a quick reminder, EME Homer involved EPA’s effort to deal with interstate …
Continue reading “Justice Scalia’s Puzzling Dissent”
CONTINUE READINGWhat’s in a Name?
Supreme Court arguments surround the policies and effects of limitations periods
A few weeks back, I posted about CTS Corp. v. Waldburger, a case then awaiting oral argument in the Supreme Court. As you may recall (or as you can read here, with links to relevant documents), Waldburger involves hazardous waste contamination, and a provision of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) that …
Continue reading “What’s in a Name?”
CONTINUE READINGTurning Water Into Wine: An “Unreasonable Use” of Water in California?
Pending Litigation Likely to Affect Scope of California Constitution’s Ban on Waste & Unreasonable Use of Water
Today a California appellate court in San Francisco heard arguments in a case that is likely to affect how broadly–or narrowly–California’s State Water Resources Control Board can apply the state’s most powerful water law. The case, Light v. California State Water Resources Control Board, involves a challenge by wine grape growers in the Russian River watershed …
Continue reading “Turning Water Into Wine: An “Unreasonable Use” of Water in California?”
CONTINUE READINGMore About EPA’s Victory
The Court sensibly upheld EPA’s method of allocating responsibility between states, while Scalia wrote an unusually sloppy dissent.
As Ann has just written the Supreme Court’s decision today in the EME Homer case was a big victory for EPA and for air pollution control. In an opinion by Justice Ginsburg, the Court upheld EPA’s interstate transport rule. Ann focused on the potential implications of the decision for the other big environmental case pending before …
Continue reading “More About EPA’s Victory”
CONTINUE READINGBreaking News: Supreme Court’s Decision Upholding Cross-State Air Rule Is Good Sign for Greenhouse Gas Rules
Huge victory for EPA in regulating air pollution that crosses state lines
The Supreme Court’s 6-2 decision issued this morning in EPA v. EME Homer, upholding the agency’s rule to control air pollution that crosses state boundaries, gives plenty of reason for optimism that the Court will also uphold EPA’s greenhouse gas rules at issue in a different case, Utility Air Regulator Group v. EPA. Both cases …
CONTINUE READINGStatutes of Limitations, Statutes of Repose, and Latent Harms
Can plaintiffs harmed years after exposure to toxic substances seek relief?
You may not have heard of CTS Corp. v. Waldburger. At a glance, it is relatively unremarkable, a private nuisance suit between landowners and a retired manufacturing facility. Much of the work on the plaintiffs’ side has been handled by students. In a sense, the case hasn’t even begun yet—a judge found that the plaintiffs waited …
Continue reading “Statutes of Limitations, Statutes of Repose, and Latent Harms”
CONTINUE READINGWill Regulatory Takings Always Be A Mess?
Takings law is a legal quagmire. It’s likely to stay that way.
I recently reread an article that my late colleague Joe Sax published exactly fifty years ago. It’s a striking piece of scholarship, all the more impressive so early in his career. But one particular statement made a particular impression on me: “Nevertheless, the predominant characteristic of this area of law is a welter of confusing …
Continue reading “Will Regulatory Takings Always Be A Mess?”
CONTINUE READINGThe Perils of Rail Transit and Democracy
How Decentralized Decision-Making Can Screw Up Rail Planning and Implementation
Americans seem to love democracy but hate many of the results. We want governmental power to be decentralized, whether it’s across three federal branches or with local control over sometimes regionally oriented land use decisions. But when the inevitable compromise that is required to get majority approval means a less-than-perfect result, from Obamacare to budget …
Continue reading “The Perils of Rail Transit and Democracy”
CONTINUE READINGU.S. Supreme Court Deals Blow to National Rails-to-Trails Movement
Justices Hand Property Owners Another Important Win, With Public Access the Loser
Some U.S. Supreme Court decisions blow through American jurisprudence like a hurricane. Others slip into the law books quietly, like the proverbial cat’s paws. Today’s Court decision in Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States falls into the latter category: largely overlooked by Court followers and the media, but with the potential to have …
Continue reading “U.S. Supreme Court Deals Blow to National Rails-to-Trails Movement”
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
