SCOTUS Stays Enforcement of EPA's "Good Neighbor" Air Pollution Rule (Updated)
In a 5-4 decision, the male justices side with the state and industry challengers and the female justices side with the Environmental Protection Agency
In a 5-4 decision, the male justices side with the state and industry challengers and the female justices side with the Environmental Protection Agency
Thanks to the lengthy approval process and special interests surrounding environmental review, it takes far longer to build anything in the United States than in other developed countries.
A new study suggests political considerations may influence the enforcement of federal environmental law.
Plus: Sen. John Fetterman introduces a new zoning reform bill, U.C. Berkeley finally beats the NIMBYs in court, and Austin's unwise "equity overlay."
Green groups dropped their suits after the various challenges to the SEC's climate disclosure rule were consolidated in a fairly conservative circuit.
The district court recognizes that the plaintiffs lack standing, but grants them leave to amend.
A recent panel discussion on whether state and local suits against fossil fuel producers are preempted by federal law (and my arguments for why the answer is "no, they are not").
A unanimous panel orders dismissal of Juliana v. United States, bringing this zombie litigation to a close.
My article surveying the effectiveness of the ESA is now in print as part of an FIU symposium.
The new reporting rules will force companies to disclose whether they are prioritizing climate change concerns.
The Justice Department is wasting no time seeking to put this zombie litigation out of its misery, and the plaintiffs are not happy about it.
In some cases, the city is also requiring homeowners to pay to replace trees that squashed their houses.
Will Judge Aiken finally accede to the law and allow this particular climate case to end?
The Fish and Wildlife Service inexplicably removes a species from its tally of species "delisted" under the Endangered Species Act.
Only one justice indicated any interest in premature consideration of state-law climate change lawsuits.
The United Federation of Teachers argues that the near-5,000 page environmental report on New York's congestion pricing plan isn't thorough enough.
Judge Aiken's reckless defiance of legal rules is turning the "Kids Climate Case" into a zombie climate case.
Claims of the Act's success at recovering imperiled species are vastly overstated, especially on private land.
The former Attorney General disagrees with me on whether state and local government climate change lawsuits belong in federal court.
Yet another federal circuit court of appeals rejects energy company removal claims.
The justices are considering whether to grant certiorari in Minnesota's lawsuit against energy companies.
Plus: A listener asks for the editors’ advice on how to spend his money.
A nice review of Climate Liberalism by Jordan Lofthouse (and a less nice one by Robert Bradley).
New York officials have primarily pitched congestion tolls as an easy cash grab for the city's subway system. New Jersey drivers and politicians aren't happy about that.
The Supreme Court is agnostic on questions of science, but clear and resolute on questions of law.
Years after the Ninth Circuit ordered the case dismissed, it is brought back to life with a surprising trial court order.
C. Boyden Gray was a pivotal figure within the Republican Party on environmental law.
The Clean Water Act decision was a unanimous win for the Sacketts, and a 5-4 victory for Justice Scalia's 2006 Rapanos v. United States plurality.
Democrats spent tens of millions of dollars last year's midterms meddling in Republican primaries. Republicans may now be borrowing a page from their playbook.
The Eighth Circuit joins the First, Third, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth in rejecting the arguments for removal, but Judge David Stras writes an interesting concurrence.
A Ninth Circuit opinion concludes that when a federal agency seeks a voluntary remand of a contested rule, that is not enough to vacate the regulation.
If SCOTUS finds in favor of a small-town Idaho couple in Sackett v. EPA, it could end the federal government's jurisdiction over millions of acres of land.
Golden State lawmakers have refused to fix the California Environmental Quality Act. Now it could cost them a brand new office building.
A new study examines what happened in British Columbia, while a second looks at how to ensure "revenue neutrality."
Hundred Acre's lawsuit alleges heavy-handed and extralegal enforcement by county environmental regulators.
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has declared that the little fish that almost stopped completion of the Tellico Dam has recovered.
The justices wrestled with the problem of identifying a clear, coherent, and administrable definition to constrain federal regulatory jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.
Ten years after their unanimous Supreme Court victory against the Environmental Protection Agency, the Sacketts return to One First Street for another round.
Five Circuits have considered, and rejected, fossil fuel efforts to get state-law tort and nuisance claims removed to federal court. Will their luck change in the Supreme Court?
My forthcoming article the good, the bad, and the likely implications of the Supreme Court's decision West Virginia v. EPA
Chief Justice Roberts writes for a six-justice majority in West Virginia v. EPA.
Environmental Protection Agency
No matter how the Supreme Court rules in West Virginia v. EPA, absent legislative action it is unlikely new power plant rules will be in force before 2024.
Three environmentalists groups had argued that the city failed to perform a state-required environmental analysis of its Minneapolis 2040 comprehensive plan.
It’s one of many anti-cryptocurrency policies emanating from the Empire State
The ruling is not as ridiculous as it sounds. But it's still a fishy decision!
A state court rules that bumble bees may qualify as "fish" under the California Endangered Species Act
A California Supreme Court decision freezing enrollment at the state's flagship university is focusing the public's fury on the normally obscure, but incredibly consequential, California Environmental Quality Act.