U.S. Supreme Court
Election 2026: Three Months to Go
Gerrymandering has given House Republicans a boost, and the Senate leans toward the GOP, but it still promises to be a real horse race.
Given partisan polarization on climate change and other environmental issues, the composition of Congress makes a big impact. We’re three months from election day. This post scopes out what things look like now. Obviously, things will change between now and the election. It’s worth reflecting, however, on how it would impact policy if current trends …
Continue reading “Election 2026: Three Months to Go”
CONTINUE READINGIn Harm’s Way
Agency’s efforts to repeal harm definition for the ESA carries significant legal risks
The Trump Administration has finalized a rule that would eliminate the definition of harm from the regulations implementing the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Harm is one component of the definition of take in the ESA, and Section 9 of the ESA prohibits take of members of endangered species. As I noted last spring, when the …
Continue reading “In Harm’s Way”
CONTINUE READINGThe Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Bayer
Bayer gets the litigation relief it was looking for in the Monsanto Roundup case.
The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Monsanto in its ongoing effort to contain its vast and growing litigation exposure stemming from its best-selling product, Roundup—the most popular weed killer in the world. In a decision by Justice Kavanaugh (joined by six other justices), the Court held that FIFRA expressly preempts the state law …
Continue reading “The Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Bayer”
CONTINUE READINGDoes More Energy Reporting = Less Climate Reporting?
The Drain is a weekly roundup of environmental and climate news from Legal Planet.
If you are one of the many loyal readers of E&E News, big change is coming to your daily routine. POLITICO announced it is shuttering E&E, the standalone, subscription-based reporting outfit that it bought in 2020. “Beginning in September, we are modernizing how we deliver our energy and environmental policy journalism and launching a …
Continue reading “Does More Energy Reporting = Less Climate Reporting?”
CONTINUE READINGRoundup at the Supreme Court
Bayer and its allies in the Trump Administration got their day in court.
Today, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Monsanto v. Durnell. As discussed in a previous blog post, the broader context of the case is significant even though the question before the Court was a narrow one: “Whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act preempts a label-based failure-to-warn claim where EPA has not required the …
Continue reading “Roundup at the Supreme Court”
CONTINUE READINGAn Encouraging Signal About Federal Preemption
A new Supreme Court ruling should help states defend their climate laws.
The Trump Administration and its allies are attacking state climate laws with challenges based on preemption, arguing that federal law trumps state powers. A new Supreme Court ruling signals that the Court respects state prerogatives and isn’t willing to find preemption without a clear basis in a federal statute. Although the facts of the case are remote from environmental law, the Court’s attitude toward preemption has broader relevance.
CONTINUE READINGFive Lessons from the Tariff Case
What can the case teach us about litigating environmental cases against Trump?
Learning Resources v. Trump, the recent tariff ruling, doesn’t say anything direct about environmental cases. But there are a series of useful lessons for environmental litigators. One obvious one is that the conservatives aren’t all “in the tank” for Trump (though Alito and maybe Thomas seem have gone pretty MAGA). Trump’s nasty insults of the conservatives who ruled against him probably won’t bring them back onto the Trump train. His effusive praise for the three conservatives who voted for the tariffs may even increase frictions within the supermajority. Here are five more lessons.
CONTINUE READINGBring Back the Legislative Veto!!
Restoring Presidential-Congressional balance also restores the Constitution’s vision of government — and could pay environmental dividends
One line that stood out in the Supreme Court’s opinion in the tariff case, Learning Resources v Trump, was this one from Neil Gorsuch: Once this Court reads a doubtful statute as granting the executive branch a given power, that power may prove almost impossible for Congress to retrieve. Any President keen on his own authority (and, …
Continue reading “Bring Back the Legislative Veto!!”
CONTINUE READINGThe Tariff Decision and the Major Questions Doctrine
The scope of the doctrine is even more confused now than before.
The tariff decision is good news in terms of checking arbitrary presidential actions, but the opinions fell short in one important area. An important argument against the tariffs was based on the Major Questions Doctrine (or MQD). That doctrine applies whan a government action has “vast political and economic significance.” If the government claims that Congress gave it the power to take such an action, it must point to clear statutory language. The doctrine is controversial in part because no one is quite clear on its basis or when it applies. The tariff decision only made that worse. The Justices took many different positions on the doctrine, deepening the confusion.
CONTINUE READINGThe Overlooked Precedent Supporting EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases
Even Roberts and Scalia agreed that Mass. v. EPA is the law
An important precedent has been overlooked in the coverage of the Trump EPA’s repeal of the 2009 Endangerment Finding. The 2009 finding relied was based on , in which the Court had held that the Clean Air Act covers air pollution and directed EPA to determine whether greenhouse gases are harmful. One reason to worry about the litigation is that the conservatives Justices all dissented from Massachusetts v. EPA over the repeal. But there’s another equally important precedent: American Electric Power v. Connecticut (AEP). That ruling was joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Scalia, so it may carry more weight.
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
