U.S. Supreme Court
What’s Left of NEPA?
It’s already taken three major blows. Yet opponents seem to fear it as much as ever.
In effect, NEPA has been poisoned, bludgeoned, and stabbed in succession by the three branches of government. You would think that NEPA reform might seem less urgent after all that. Yet permit reformer still seem to think it’s as dangerous as ever, like a vampire that can only be killed by a wooden stake through the heart at midnight.
CONTINUE READINGGolf. Trump. Lies. And NEPA.
What more could you ask for in a single court opinion?
In a Monday ruling, Judge Reyes told the government to stop work on Trump’s plan to demolish a D.C. public golf course and replace it with one for pro tournaments. There are intriguing legal issues: whether a President’s social media posts can establish the basis for judicial review; whether golfers have standing to sue to preserve an existing course; how to deal with apparent dishonesty by government lawyers; and last but not last, whether the Supreme Court has eliminated NEPA’s segmentation doctrine. All in a beautifully written district court opinion.
CONTINUE READINGThe Other Big Environmental Case at the Supreme Court
Guest contributor Clifford Villa writes that Dept. of the Air Force v. Prutehi Guahan, which will be argued Wednesday, raises profound questions for democracy and environmental justice.
Guest contributor Clifford Villa is law professor at the University of New Mexico School of Law. With all eyes on Suncor Energy v. Boulder County, it’s been easy to overlook another environmental law case on the docket of the U.S. Supreme Court this week: Dept. of the Air Force v. Prutehi Guahan. Prutehi Guahan illustrates …
Continue reading “The Other Big Environmental Case at the Supreme Court”
CONTINUE READINGThe Arguments We Did and Didn’t Hear in Suncor v. Boulder
Oral arguments in the climate case before the Supreme Court gave hints to possible outcomes. But one of Boulder’s strong answers to the “tort suits are regulation” objection went unmade.
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments today in Suncor Energy v. County Commissioners of Boulder County. At issue is whether the city and county of Boulder can move forward with its state court case against defendants Exxon Mobil Corporation and Suncor Energy for allegedly deceiving the public about their products’ role in climate change. Some …
Continue reading “The Arguments We Did and Didn’t Hear in Suncor v. Boulder”
CONTINUE READINGThe Polluter-Pays Principle and Its Enemies
An essay by Alejandro Camacho and Robert L. Glicksman on corporate fraud, weaponizing preemption, and the survival of climate accountability.
This post by Alejandro Camacho and Robert L. Glicksman is an excerpt from an article first published in the University of Chicago Law Review. On the morning of December 30, 2021, the Marshall Fire ignited in Boulder County, Colorado. Driven by hurricane-force winds and fueled by vegetation desiccated by years of drought, it burned more than six …
Continue reading “The Polluter-Pays Principle and Its Enemies”
CONTINUE READINGThe Legal Planet Guide to Suncor Energy v. County Commissioners of Boulder County
UCLA Law experts explain everything you need to know about Suncor v. Boulder as the climate case heads to the U.S. Supreme Court.
LAST UPDATED SEPT. 30 The Supreme Court hears oral arguments on October 5, 2026 in Suncor Energy v. County Commissioners of Boulder County. The plaintiffs in this case are local governmental entities in the State of Colorado that face substantial and rising costs to mitigate the impacts of climate change in the form of heat …
Continue reading “The Legal Planet Guide to Suncor Energy v. County Commissioners of Boulder County”
CONTINUE READINGClimate at SCOTUS, Electrification Victories, Media Moves
The Drain is a regular roundup of environmental and climate news from Legal Planet.
It’s not every year that climate change looms large at the U.S. Supreme Court, but it will this coming term. The Supreme Court will begin its 2026-2027 term with a case brought by a Colorado county seeking millions of dollars from oil and gas companies for their role in exacerbating climate change. The justices announced recently …
Continue reading “Climate at SCOTUS, Electrification Victories, Media Moves”
CONTINUE READINGElection 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 READING










