Litigation
A Risky FWS Proposal to Limit ESA Petitions
The Endangered Species Act has long been a lightning-rod for controversy. The last administration tried to significantly circumscribe the scope of the ESA in a wide range of ways (see, e.g, here). The Obama Administration up to this point in time has in general sharply contrasted with its predecessor in ESA management, including listing a …
Continue reading “A Risky FWS Proposal to Limit ESA Petitions”
CONTINUE READINGRight on the Commerce Clause, wrong on the ESA
Cross-posted at CPRBlog. As Rick noted earlier, the Ninth Circuit is now the fifth federal circuit court of appeals to reject a Commerce Clause challenge to the ESA. In San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority v. Salazar, a Ninth Circuit panel upheld protection of the Delta smelt. I agree with Rick’s analysis of the Commerce …
Continue reading “Right on the Commerce Clause, wrong on the ESA”
CONTINUE READINGNinth Circuit Rejects Commerce Clause Challenge to ESA
Aligning itself with four other federal circuits that have addressed the question, the Ninth Circuit has ruled that application of the Endangered Species Act to California’s imperiled Delta Smelt doesn’t violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority v. Salazar (http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/03/25/10-15192.pdf ) is the latest chapter in the long-running …
Continue reading “Ninth Circuit Rejects Commerce Clause Challenge to ESA”
CONTINUE READINGMight recent events allow Governor Brown to consider a new direction for AB 32 implementation?
My colleague Jonathan Zasloff suggests that environmental justice groups are using litigation to try to get leverage for some sort of compensation or other measures, rather than to actually stop the state’s cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gases. I doubt that. But what I do wonder — with no evidence, but I can speculate wildly on …
CONTINUE READINGCan the Air Resources Board continue to implement measures to reduce greenhouse gases?
One interesting feature of the court decision preventing the state from moving forward with AB 32 is that the court’s decision seems to halt implementation of the entire scoping plan. As I’ll explain, this is an odd result, and one that may be legally required but doesn’t make practical sense. The legal flaw the court …
CONTINUE READINGName That CEQA Plaintiff!
The recent environmental justice lawsuit on AB 32 carried with it a typical CEQA characteristic: the plaintiff is a community organization formed for the purpose of a lawsuit whose name is usually a play on the issue. Thus, this case was Association of Irritated Residents v. CARB: “AIR,” get it? Cute. But not even close …
Continue reading “Name That CEQA Plaintiff!”
CONTINUE READINGTwo Cheers for Environmental Justice Cynicism
Ann is a little puzzled about what the environmental justice community hopes to achieve by suing the state over cap-and-trade: why would a carbon tax be better? she asks. Sean says that we need to understand that the EJ community is deeply committed to a series of process-oriented goals, and believe that these goals have …
Continue reading “Two Cheers for Environmental Justice Cynicism”
CONTINUE READINGAB 32 Lawsuit: Assessing the Environmental Justice Arguments Against Cap and Trade
As Cara wrote yesterday, a California court has put AB 32 on hold temporarily on the grounds that in preparing its scoping plan, the California Air Resources Board failed to assess alternatives to its plan with appropriate detail. In particular, the court took issue with CARB’s failure , under the California Environmental Quality Act, to …
CONTINUE READINGCourt issues final ruling in AB 32 challenge — enjoins implementation of AB 32 scoping plan pending CEQA fixes
On Friday, a California superior court judge handed down his decision in the challenge, brought by environmental justice advocates, to the state’s implementation of AB 32, California’s landmark Global Warming Solutions Act. The decision is available here. More analysis to come. On first read, the decision looks very similar to the tentative decision issued by the …
CONTINUE READINGThe Worst Supreme Court Environmental Decision?
Recently appearing in my in-box is Pepperdine Law School’s latest law porn, a glossy brochure about its upcoming symposium, “Supreme Mistakes: Exploring the Most Maligned Decisions in Supreme Court History.” Dan will speak, but unless he decides to talk about it, environmental law doesn’t figure to get on the agenda: none of the other speakers has particular …
Continue reading “The Worst Supreme Court Environmental Decision?”
CONTINUE READING