Regulation
Trump’s Slump
The Trump regime is losing ground, creating new policy opportunities.
Trump’s term began with brutal attacks on environment and clean energy policies, but he now longer looks unstoppable. Dems are likely to make major gains in the mid-terms, consumers are deeply unhappy, and his Iran War drags on. These setbacks create openings to push back against his “energy dominance” agenda. Outside the U.S., his effort to expand fossil fuel use is failing. Domestically, there are now openings to blunt his attacks on clean tech and prepare the ground for new policies when he leaves office.
CONTINUE READINGWorrying Gaps in CA Climate Disclosure Implementation
Guest contributors Cynthia Hanawalt and Andy Fitch write that CARB lacks authority to exempt insurers from GHG emissions reporting.
Guest contributors: Cynthia Hanawalt is the Director of Climate and Business Law at Columbia University’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law and Andy Fitch is a Climate and Business Law fellow at the Sabin Center. We recently surveyed the empirical literature regarding the impacts of corporate greenhouse-gas (GHG) disclosure on companies’ emissions, and called for …
Continue reading “Worrying Gaps in CA Climate Disclosure Implementation”
CONTINUE READINGEliminating the Endangerment Finding Doesn’t Mean the Government Can’t Regulate Cars and Trucks
The Clean Air Act and Energy Independence and Security Act still give EPA, California, and NHTSA significant power.
The withdrawal of EPA’s endangerment finding is bad in many respects that I don’t want to downplay and that many have already focused on. But it’s also worth stressing that, should a president take office in 2029 who cares about climate and air pollution from cars and trucks, the federal government — and California — …
CONTINUE READINGDissecting EPA’s Endangerment Repeal: Series Wrap-Up:
Here’s what you need to know to understand the upcoming legal battles.
Yesterday was the last of five Legal Planet posts on EPA’s repeal of the Endangerment Finding, which it based on legal arguments that it has no power to regulate vehicle emissions of greenhouse gases. The series began with a quick overview of the issues. The remaining posts focus on the reasons that EPA was right to issue the Endangerment Finding in the first place in 2009, the legal precedents supporting the Endangerment Finding. and the impact of the repeal on future climate actions. The bottom line is that EPA was right to issue the Endangerment Finding and wrong to repeal it.
CONTINUE READINGMore Pesticides Please!
Trump’s ‘Toxics First’ Agenda continues with a new executive order mandating the production of glyphosate . . . as a matter of national security!
Late last Wednesday, sandwiched between all of the news about the repeal of the endangerment finding and the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Trump tariffs, the White House issued a new Executive Order invoking a Korean War era statute, the Defense Production Act of 1950, to ensure that chemical companies can continue to manufacture a …
Continue reading “More Pesticides Please!”
CONTINUE READINGThe Trump Administration is Squandering Our Natural Heritage
Proposed Endangered Species Act regulations are designed to stifle protections and provide developers even more power.
The world’s ecosystems have been subject to an increasingly dangerous cocktail of stressors from land and ocean over-development, invasive species, and pollution. But rather than stem the tide of these harms, the Trump administration has resurrected several regulatory changes to the Endangered Species Act designed to stifle species’ protections and provide land developers even more power to …
Continue reading “The Trump Administration is Squandering Our Natural Heritage”
CONTINUE READINGIs This the End of Cost-Benefit Analysis?
Trump’s EPA is effectively abandoning economic analysis
Maybe the Administration means to keep cost-benefit analysis in place for some other kinds of regulations at EPA or elsewhere. But if the courts uphold the EPA’s refusal to quantify the enormous harms caused by air pollution, it’s hard to see an argument for quantifying many other regulatory benefits. In other settings, environmentalists might applaud the repeal of cost-benefit analysis. In the current setting, however, the purpose is all too plain: to make it easier for the Administration to ignore the ways it is endangering human life and health.
CONTINUE READINGRollin’ Coal!
One year in on Trump’s ‘Toxic First’ Agenda and the MAGA assault on environmental law.
They call it Rollin’ Coal — when you retrofit your diesel truck (and they are always trucks) to emit more pollution. A lot more. You may have seen the pictures: big dark clouds of fine particulates and a bounty of air toxics — a big f*#ck you to Prius drivers, environmentalists, and, well, all of …
Continue reading “Rollin’ Coal!”
CONTINUE READINGEveryday Christmas: The Gift of the Commons
Clean air. Clean water. We receive these public goods every day without payment
One of the Christmas classics is the Jimmy Stewart movie, It’s a Wonderful Life. George Bailey, Stewart’s character, is despondent about his life until he learns how much he has unknowingly helped others and how grateful they are. It’s heartwarming, if also a bit corny. There’s a flip side to that story: the need to remember …
Continue reading “Everyday Christmas: The Gift of the Commons”
CONTINUE READINGGames Deregulators Play
Here are the five moves the Trump EPA consistently uses to justify deregulation.
If you start reading the Trump Administration’s arguments for deregulation, a repetitive feeling soon sets in. Every deregulation is different, of course, but there are stock arguments that seem to surface again and again.These arguments have a distortion effect, blurring the benefits of regulations while magnifying their costs.
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
