Pollution & Health
Justice 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 READINGQuantifying Environmental Justice (& Injustice) in California–An Update
California Improves an Already-Powerful Environmental Justice Analytical Tool
A year ago, I wrote about an important environmental justice initiative pioneered by the California Environmental Protection Agency and its subsidiary entity, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. That 2013 initiative, titled CalEnviroScreen, divided up the State of California by zip code, applied 11 environmental health and pollution factors, assessed each of the state’s …
Continue reading “Quantifying Environmental Justice (& Injustice) in California–An Update”
CONTINUE READINGA Victory for Clean Air
The D.C. Circuit has upheld EPA’s regulation of mercury from coal-fired plants. We can all breath easier as a result.
EPA won an important victory in the D.C. Circuit today. In White Stallion Energy Center v. EPA, the court upheld EPA’s new regulations limiting mercury from coal-fired power plants. The main issue in the case was about a threshold requirement for regulation. Before setting limits on mercury from coal plants, EPA had to consider studies of …
Continue reading “A Victory for Clean Air”
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 READINGRand Paul versus Clean Water
Rand Paul’s plan to cut wetlands protection and make enforcement against polluters impossible.
Rand Paul recently won a big victory in the straw poll held by CPAC,the Conservative Political Action Conference. In the environmental area, his signature measure is the Defense of Environment and Property Act. On its surface, the goal of the law is to cut back on federal jurisdiction over wetlands. The bill would drastically cut back …
Continue reading “Rand Paul versus Clean Water”
CONTINUE READINGHow Responsible Are Americans for China’s Pollution Problem?
An online conversation from several perspectives
Yesterday, I participated in an online conversation at Chinafile.com on the question of “How Responsible Are Americans For China’s Pollution Problem?” I post the lead comment by David Vance Wagner of the International Council on Clean Transportation along with my response. Elizabeth Economy from the Council on Foreign Relations and Isabel Hilton of Chinadialogue.net (among …
Continue reading “How Responsible Are Americans for China’s Pollution Problem?”
CONTINUE READINGDeconstructing Today’s U.S. Supreme Court Arguments in Utility Air Regulatory Group
The EPA Could Well Lose This Challenge to Its Greenhouse Gas Reduction Efforts
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments today in the most important environmental law case of the current Term: Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency. Based on those arguments–and, more importantly, the justices’ questions and comments–it appears that EPA’s efforts to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from stationary sources under the Clean Air Act’s …
CONTINUE READINGPreviewing Next Week’s Climate Change Arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court
Big Stakes and Big Players in This Year’s Biggest Environmental Case
On Monday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the biggest environmental law case of its current Term, Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA. Legal Planet colleagues Ann Carlson and Dan Farber have already posted their thoughts on the case. Let me add mine. Utility Air Regulatory Group involves EPA’s authority to regulate stationary …
Continue reading “Previewing Next Week’s Climate Change Arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court”
CONTINUE READINGCalifornia’s Proposed Drinking Water Program Reorganization: A Primer
What would the shake-up mean for those who currently lack affordable access to safe drinking water?
A shake-up of California’s struggling Drinking Water Program is in the works. What follows is a little history, context, and a few thoughts on what it will likely mean for drinking-water stakeholders—in particular those who have the hardest time accessing safe drinking water. A history of problems for the Drinking Water Program Last April, Jonathan …
Continue reading “California’s Proposed Drinking Water Program Reorganization: A Primer”
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
