This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The Supreme Court tends to get all the attention, but for every Supreme Court opinion on environmental law there are probably fifty opinions in the lower federal courts. Collectively, the lower courts have done fat least as much to shape the law than the Supreme Courts occasional interventions. Any top ten list is a bit arbitrary.
But the federal government in the United States has failed to address it so far. Opponents will undoubtedly argue that such state-based initiatives conflict with federal law. Aviation is a significant and growing source of greenhouse gas emissions.
The case concerns the scope of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from existing fossil fuel power plants under Section 111(d) of the CleanAirAct (CAA).
The same is true in environmental law. Was it a fundamental paradigm shift, re-centering the law on new values? With all this in mind, here are the cases that I see as making up the canon and anti-canons of environmental law. This was a case under the Endangered Species Act. The issue goes beyond which side wins.
But the oral comments also included several speakers representing the industries producing a substantial amount of this deadly air pollution. Their main arguments include two disturbing tactics that come straight out of the disinformation playbook : casting doubt on the science, and pressing the EPA to violate a law passed by Congress.
The federal government is now supporting that role with federal funding for states. The Inflation Reduction Act provides another important source of state funding. A key provision (IRA § 60114) appropriates $250 million to support emission reduction planning by state governments. States have played a critical role in U.S.
If governments bypass or undermine science and public comments in policy making, our health could be in jeopardy from increased pollution, cases of foodborne illnesses, politically-driven medicine approvals or disapprovals, and more. This is a major federal law that governs if a chemical will be regulated, limited, or even banned.
Wells Environmental Law Clinic and the Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability have released a new report, Concentrated Overburden , that explores the connection between California’s history of racialized land use practices and environmental injustice throughout the state. The Frank G. Research conducted by students in the Frank G.
The decision focuses on EPA’s authority under a specific section of the CleanAirAct. But a closer read suggests more sweeping, longer-term implications for incentivizing the development of clean energy projects nationwide. What does this mean for clean energy projects? What is the case about? .
EPA’s AirToxScreen uses the National Air Toxics Assessment to offer a location-based screening tool that shows long-term cancer and health risks given air emissions of hazardous chemicals over a person’s lifetime. What is our government doing to keep us safe from harm?
MCAP, in partnership with the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), petitioned the county health department to use its emergency powers to limit emissions from the facility. We also estimated that EtO emissions contributed to more than 80 percent of the cancer risk attributable to toxic air pollution around the facility.
The 8 th Circuit Court of Appeals has largely affirmed a District Court order finding that Ameren Missouri violated the NSR provisions of the CleanAirAct in making major modifications to its Rush Island facility. 7413(b), expressly provides for injunctive relief to redress violations of the Act.”.
However, since major US environmental laws are enacted to protect the air, water, and land separately (i.e. the CleanAirAct, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act), as a result, EPA programs are often implemented narrowly, not holistically.
In a case that could open the door to more citizen suits to enforce mobile source provisions of the CleanAirAct—a category of enforcement actions that has so far failed to gain much traction—the 10 th Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued an opinion broadly upholding a non-profit organization’s standing.
On November 17, Erie Coke Corporation, along with a corporate officer, have been indicted by a federal grand jury in Erie on among other charges, Violation of the CleanAirAct, United States Attorney Cindy K. McDaniel and Martin Harrell are prosecuting this case on behalf of the government. Chung announced today.
It was only once that shift was made that we could begin to think of contaminated rivers, smog, and clearcutting as part of the same body of law. In other words, it was only then that we could in terms of “environmental law” rather than distinct bodies of rules governing a scattering of different situations.
It then disapproved plans that had been submitted by state governments much earlier and issued its own plan covering sources in 23 upwind states. By law, that suit had to be brought in the D.C. The Court’s Ruling Justice Gorsuch, a fierce skeptic of government regulation, wrote the opinion for the Court.
On the other hand, government regulation is about making hard choices – and the structure of the CleanAirAct leaves us without a mechanism to make those hard choices. first appeared on Law and the Environment. Otherwise, the phrase “adequate margin of safety” would have little meaning.
CT , the Supreme Court said this: We hold that the CleanAirAct and the EPA actions it authorizes displace any federal common law right to seek abatement of carbon-dioxide emissions from fossil-fuel fired power plants. In 2011, in AEP v. Connecticut , 564 U. 410 (2011). Post, at 20.
This rule was a clear opportunity to exercise the Agency’s authority under the CleanAirAct to promote the most advanced emissions reductions technology. As it readies its next step, EPA still has not granted California its waiver for the Heavy-duty Omnibus and Advanced Clean Trucks rules.
Electrification is a critical component of building decarbonization, and local governments are taking a leading role in this policy space. Berkeley decision does and does not say, local governments can better understand that many of them have options for electrifying new buildings. In exploring what the CRA v.
On January 26, PennEnvironment and CleanAir Council announced they will file in U.S. District Court on Monday a proposed consent decree in settlement of their federal CleanAirAct lawsuit against United States Steel Corporation. The agreement mandates that U.S. Most of the penalty money ($4.5
According to GenOn, EPA’s action offended the cooperative federalism structure of the CleanAirAct by undermining a state’s power to determine how to achieve air control standards. at 27 (quoting 42 U.S.C. Further, the court noted that it was satisfied that EPA had thoroughly examined the relevant scientific data.
The bench trial took place last month in the state capitol, Helena, where 16 youth plaintiffs ages 5 to 22 made the case that Montana’s unwavering promotion of fossil fuels violates the state constitution’s guarantee to a “clean and healthful environment.” This is not supposed to be a town hall or a popularity contest,” he said.
In doing so, the court found itself “in accord with the other courts of appeals, which have unanimously found there is no federal jurisdiction where state or local governments have brought state-law actions against energy companies for conduct relating to climate change.” s claims were still grounded in that supplanted common law.
While the agency has failed to update the rule as required under the CleanAirAct, last year, EPA identified 23 “elevated cancer risk” commercial sterilizers and is currently working to inform communities and work with state regulators and the facilities to decrease emissions. What can be done? Here’s how.
The Department of Environmental Protection posted a notice on its website announcing conventional oil and gas well operators will not be eligible for new methane reduction well plugging grants if they are not in compliance with state law and regulations. “To
States and local air quality regulators have the legal authority to set particulate matter (PM), ozone, and nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions standards and adopt regulations for these pollutants when they are already in attainment of the national ambient air quality standards ( NAAQS ) set by the U.S.
Department of the Treasury is hosting a public hearing on the December 2023 proposed regulations governing implementation of the Section 45V Credit for Production of Clean Hydrogen. As Treasury moves to finalize regulations governing implementation of 45V, it must maintain a rigorous approach that is responsive to its statutory charge.
lawsgoverning methane removal via atmospheric oxidation enhancement (AOE). It then discusses relevant international law and U.S. law, including relevant international agreements, rules of customary international law, U.S. federal environmental law, and a brief discussion of U.S. state and local law.
The Sabin Center for Climate Change Law and Environmental Defense Fund have just launched IRAtracker.org. Tracking IRA Implementation The IRA Tracker will monitor how federal agencies are implementing the law. The post New Inflation Reduction Act Tracker Launched by the Sabin Center and EDF appeared first on Climate Law Blog.
Many of these cases asserted nuisance and other tort law claims. More recently, states and municipalities have asserted claims under consumer protection laws.). which affirmed the dismissal of state-law public nuisance, private nuisance, and trespass claims. Chevron Corp.
Most prominently, because the approach is changing from rewarding specific technologies to rewarding anything that meets the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions threshold of “clean”—hence the “tech-neutral” label—exactly how the government goes about determining whether or not something is actually eligible will be enormously important.
Part Three, below, explores preemption questions in the context of other domestic frameworks: California’s climate-disclosure laws and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s GHG emissions reporting regime. Preemption of a state law arises under the Supremacy Clause in the Constitution.
Camera Bartolotta (R-Washington) circulated a cosponsor memo announcing she plans to introduce legislation to eliminate the ability of citizens, local governments and anyone else to appeal permits issued by DEP for natural gas pipelines and related facilities to the Environmental Hearing Board. On May 16, Sen. of Bordentown v. F.E.R.C. ,
The court’s reasoning came down to an interpretation of CERCLA that the phrase “subject to” was intended to mean “governed or affected by” rather than “obedient to.” This Blog Post was authored by Brielle Brown, a summer associate. ” Id.
Bedrock federal environmental, health, and safety laws have gaping loopholes and exemptions that allow radioactive oil and gas materials to go virtually unregulated, including the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act that governs waste management, the Atomic Energy Act, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the CleanAirAct.
Turner , forthcoming in the Environmental Law Reporter in April 2020, defines LTZs as bounded, geographic areas in which reductions in vehicular traffic are achieved or attempted through legal and policy approaches and surveys the U.S. law questions that arise in connection with the creation of LTZs. CleanAirAct, the U.S.
Amidst historically low oil prices and economic shutdowns, fossil fuel companies continue to defend against lawsuits brought by state and local governments claiming climate-change related damages. 1331 because the cities’ claims were “necessarily governed by federal common law.” In the City of Oakland et al. BP PLC et al.,
An excerpt: The CWA as enacted a half-century ago was enormously ambitious and, with the benefit of hindsight, quite naive: in the law’s legislative findings, Congress declared that “it is the national goal that the discharge of pollutants into the navigable waters be eliminated by 1985.” That obviously did not, and will not, happen.
Lorenzen , an attorney at Crowell & Moring LLP who has led the coalition of petitioners challenging the Clean Power Plan before the D.C. Circuit and Supreme Court; and. * Gerald Torres , a professor at Cornell Law School whose recent work has focused on interactions between social movements, litigation, and legislative change.
Over the last five years, cities, counties, and states across the country have sued fossil fuel companies alleging that the companies violated state law in marketing their products as safe. Second are cases that allege the fossil fuel company activities violate state consumer protection laws. On April 24, the U.S.
Petitioners include thirty States, State agencies, and local government entities and more than one hundred private companies, cooperatives, and industry trade groups. The Clean Power Plan would affect every electricity user in the United States, from the largest manufacturing plant to the smallest home. The lawsuit, West Virginia v.
Proposed Rule 2305, recently released by the District in discussion draft form, would establish the Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE) Program — which would apply to owners and operators of warehouses located in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) with greater than 100,000 square feet of indoor space in a single building.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 12,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content