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
A new chapter of global climate accountability has hopefully begun, as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) prepares to issue an advisory opinion on the Obligations of States in respect of ClimateChange. Hearings for that opinion began today with over 100 countries and other parties presenting over two weeks. L to R: Ms.
Despite the ongoing debate on whether ITLOS has jurisdiction to issue an advisory opinion on climatechange, if the Tribunal asserts jurisdiction (on jurisdiction, see here and here) , there is still much to uncover. Assuming the ITLOS will assert jurisdiction, this post’s objective is twofold.
Achieving the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting warming to “well below” 2°C above pre-industrial levels requires urgent and serious steps to reduce greenhouse gas. Shipping currently makes up nearly 3% of anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHG) released worldwide, and those emissions are on track to increase.
How would such a legal system work, and could giving rights to nature help in the legal battle against climatechange? Climate litigation using the rights of nature. The complaint also alleges that climatechange is one of the threats faced by the river. A few case studies offer some insight. State of Colorado.
On April 29, 2021 the German Constitutional Court (the Bundesverfassungsgericht, or GCC) rendered a ground-breaking judgment, requiring the German government to establish specific plans to achieve its mid-century greenhouse gas emissions goal. (An An English press release is available here. Background.
For example, the ongoing debate over the impact of certain pesticides in agriculture , greenhouse gas emissions are often a battle between the science and industry's attempts to muddy the science and government lobbying to roll back legislation (2). Typically used in conjunction with “greenhouse gas” but some emissions are not GHGs.
(credit: PBI Actuarial Consultants) Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, in coordination with an equally myopic and partisan Florida Legislature, has approved new state legislation ( HB 1645 ) that eliminates the term “climatechange” from numerous existing Florida statutes that former Republican Governor Charlie Crist signed into law in 2008.
The court ruled that the failure to set specific mitigation measures to slow climatechange, in accordance with the state’s obligations under European and international law, is unlawful and infringes the plaintiffs’ right to a favorable environment. Background to the claim. R ), which was created in 2019 to bring this case.
In a series of posts (beginning here , and ending here ) last month, I outlined an approach to climate policy that emphasizes the role of subsidies in building political support and technological progress for climate policy.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for ClimateChange Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. HERE ARE THE ADDITIONS TO THE CLIMATE CASE CHART SINCE UPDATE # 126. and non-U.S. Supreme Court. 17-1258 (D.C.
We are driving a dagger through the heart of climate-change religion and ushering in Americas Golden Age, or so said EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, who used to be considered a fairly rational person. And scientists haven’t ignored the arguments made by climate deniers — they’ve tested and rejected each of them. .”
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for ClimateChange Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. HERE ARE THE ADDITIONS TO THE CLIMATE CASE CHART SINCE UPDATE #130: FEATURED CASE. and non-U.S.
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