U.S. Supreme Court
Hillary Clinton, Climate Change, and the ‘Sliding Doors’ of History
Here’s what could have happened instead of Trump’s crusade against climate action, if Clinton had squeaked out a victory in 2016.
If Hillary Clinton had won, we would be much further along today in the battle to cut carbon emissions and control climate change. Instead, Trump was a climate disaster. The bottom line: Elections do matter. Not just for politicians but for all of us.
CONTINUE READINGBig Oil Runs to the Supreme Court
Oil and gas companies want the justices to take up Honolulu’s climate liability case because this type of litigation is starting to gain strength.
The oil industry and its allies are attempting a full-court press to convince the Supreme Court justices they should shield them from climate liability lawsuits brought by cities and states throughout the U.S—and that they should do so now, before they face any court trials over climate-related damages. This unusual full-court press comes in the …
Continue reading “Big Oil Runs to the Supreme Court”
CONTINUE READINGThe Supreme Court’s Top-10 Environmental Law Decisions
If these decisions had come out differently, environmental law would look very different than it does today.
Here’s what you really need to know about the Supreme Court’s rulings on environmental law — including its recent trend toward weakening environmental protection.
CONTINUE READINGTemporary Takings and the Adaptation Dilemma
Current law penalizes adaptation measures because of the risk of takings liability.
Is it unconstitutional for the government to build a levee that reduces the risk of urban flooding but diverts the water to nearby farmlands? The answer could be yes, unless the government pays for flood easements on the rural lands. But if the government doesn’t build the levee, it faces no liability from the urban …
Continue reading “Temporary Takings and the Adaptation Dilemma”
CONTINUE READINGJudicial Deference to Agencies: A Timeline
Decisions about judicial deference to agencies on legal issues didn’t begin or end with Chevron.
The Supreme Court is about to make a major decision about the balance of power between courts and agencies like EPA. Here’s what you need to know about the history if the issue to understand what’s going today.
CONTINUE READINGWhy the New Climate Reg for Coal is a Perfectly Normal EPA Rule
EPA’s approach isn’t a novel innovation. It’s just EPA applying its usual approach.
The problem isn’t that EPA’s new climate regulation for power plants will crush the coal-fired generation industry. It’s that much of the industry is so economically weak it can’t survive any kind of regulation.
CONTINUE READINGEPA’s New Power Plant Rules Have Dropped. What Happens Next?
Media battles. Lawsuits. Stay requests. And political mayhem.
The release of Biden’s new climate regulations for power plants will unleash a maelstrom of legal and political battles. One key question: Will the Supreme Court short circuit the litigation process by staying the rules.
CONTINUE READINGDon’t Count Your Judicial Vultures Before They Hatch
The conservative Supreme Court majority may turn out as bad as we fear. Or maybe not.
It’s not hard to imagine the conservative super-majority pursuing its campaign against regulatory agencies like vultures picking over the bones of environmental law. That’s certainly possible – vulture eggs do, after all, generally hatch into vultures. But it’s not by any means a done deal. There are multiple pathways the Court could take – none …
Continue reading “Don’t Count Your Judicial Vultures Before They Hatch”
CONTINUE READINGU.S. Supreme Court Revisits, Tightens Regulatory Takings Limits on Land Use Regulation
California Homeowner’s Takings Challenge to County’s Traffic Impact Fee Heads Back to State Court
On April 12th, the U.S. Supreme Court revisited a constitutional doctrine near and dear to its institutional heart: when and under what circumstances does a land use permit condition violate the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause? In yet another “regulatory takings” case from California, the Supreme Court wound up not answering that precise question. Instead, the …
CONTINUE READINGChevron Gets the Headlines, But State Farm May Be More Important
The abortion pill case could undermine the authority of agency’s expert judgments.
The Chevron doctrine requires judges to defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statute if that interpretation is reasonable. The State Farm case, which is much less widely known, requires courts to defer to an agency’s expert judgment unless its reasoning has ignored contrary evidence or has a logical hole. As you probably already know, …
Continue reading “Chevron Gets the Headlines, But State Farm May Be More Important”
CONTINUE READING