Litigation
California High Speed Rail Slowed by Court Decisions
Judge rules the train needs a new business plan and project-level environmental review
California Superior Court Judge Michael Kenny dealt two setbacks to high speed rail yesterday that are likely to delay the project significantly. First, Judge Kenny ruled that the state committee that approved the disbursement of bond money for the project acted without sufficient evidence to justify the disbursal. California law empowers the High-Speed Passenger Train …
Continue reading “California High Speed Rail Slowed by Court Decisions”
CONTINUE READINGThe Significance of EPA’s Proposed Power Plant Standards
Although they won’t have immediate impacts, EPA’s proposed rules for new coal plants will indirectly help shape the future of the industry.
There’s an uproar over EPA’s proposed rules for CO2 emissions from new coal plants, even though no one expects anyone to build a new coal plant for at least a decade. I’ve argued (here and here) that the industry won’t have standing to challenge the rules because they won’t have any imminent impact. In fact, …
Continue reading “The Significance of EPA’s Proposed Power Plant Standards”
CONTINUE READINGCalifornia cap and trade survives industry tax challenge
Auctions can proceed in one of the state’s signature climate change programs
ARB’s winning streak in climate cases continues. A California superior court has rejected a prominent set of industry challenges to the state’s cap-and-trade program, upholding a significant element of California’s suite of programs to comply with AB 32 and to reduce the state’s greenhouse gas emissions back to 1990 levels by 2020. (Opinion here.) The cases were filed by the …
Continue reading “California cap and trade survives industry tax challenge”
CONTINUE READINGStanding for Coal?
In a previous post I questioned whether anyone would have standing to challenge EPA’s new plant regulations for coal plants, considering that coal plants are current uneconomical anyway due to low natural gas prices. I was pleased that Inside EPA wrote a story about my argument, and even more pleased that the story reported on …
Continue reading “Standing for Coal?”
CONTINUE READINGIs Missouri v. Holland in the Court’s crosshairs?
Justices look for limits on Treaty Power in domestic dispute case
The headline environmental cases at the Supreme Court this term are of course about the Clean Air Act, specifically about its application to cross-state pollution (as Dan has explained here) and to greenhouse emissions (as Ann has addressed here and here). But sometimes cases that at first glance seem wholly unrelated to the environment could …
Continue reading “Is Missouri v. Holland in the Court’s crosshairs?”
CONTINUE READINGNew Standing Barriers Erected for Federal Court Climate Change Litigation
Recent Ninth Circuit Decision Likely to Spell the End of Much Citizen Suit Litigation Over Climate Change in Federal Courts
In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court’s famously ruled in Massachusetts v. USEPA that petitioners in that case had standing to sue the Environmental Protection Agency in federal court to challenge EPA’s failure to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. Observers then could have been forgiven for thinking that this ruling flung open …
Continue reading “New Standing Barriers Erected for Federal Court Climate Change Litigation”
CONTINUE READINGELQ’s Annual Review issue now available online
Every year, Ecology Law Quarterly publishes its Annual Review of Environmental and Natural Resource Law. The latest version is now available at ELQ’s web site. Check out these articles from the issue. You’ll find they cover a tremendous amount of ground in a way that is both educational and entertaining. And at the ELQ site …
Continue reading “ELQ’s Annual Review issue now available online”
CONTINUE READINGWhere Have You Gone, Justice Stevens?
The Supreme Court Misses Justice Stevens’ Influence & Perspective on Environmental Law
With the commencement of the U.S. Supreme Court’s new Term, it’s appropriate to note–and bemoan–the absence of a strong environmental voice on the Court these days. Until his retirement in 2010 after a quarter century on the Court, Justice John Paul Stevens ably served in that role. By contrast, none of the current justices seems …
Continue reading “Where Have You Gone, Justice Stevens?”
CONTINUE READINGMass. v. EPA bears fruit for environmental petitioners
Court rules that EPA must decide if new water quality standars are needed to protect the Gulf of Mexico
Cross-posted at CPRBlog. A US District Court in Louisiana recently ruled, in Gulf Restoration Network v. Jackson, that EPA must decide whether it has to impose new water quality standards for nutrient pollution in the Mississippi River watershed. Although that might seem far afield from the Supreme Court’s greenhouse gas emissions decision in Massachusetts v. …
Continue reading “Mass. v. EPA bears fruit for environmental petitioners”
CONTINUE READINGReforming Groundwater Adjudications: New Pritzker Environmental Policy Brief
A new report discusses groundwater in CA.
The Emmett Center on Climate Change and the Environment has released its latest Pritzker Environmental Law and Policy Brief, “Allocating Under Water: Reforming California’s Groundwater Adjudications.” California leads the nation in groundwater extraction, but it lags behind in updating groundwater-related laws and regulations. As a result, protracted litigation clogs the courts and often fails to protect water …
Continue reading “Reforming Groundwater Adjudications: New Pritzker Environmental Policy Brief”
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
