Search Results
Use the filters on the left-hand side of this screen to refine the results further by topic or document type.

Does the First Amendment Protect Fossil Fuel Companies’ Public Speech?

Numerous cities, states, and counties have sued fossil fuel companies, with claims based on evidence found in the companies’ own internal documents and statements. These companies have argued their public statements are protected by the First Amendment’s freedom of speech and right to petition clauses. This Article describes the current litigation, discusses the companies’ statements disseminated through various sources, and summarizes U.S. Supreme Court precedent and caselaw on commercial speech.

Lovejoy v. Amcox Oil and Gas, LLC

A district court granted in part and denied in part a pipeline owner's motion for summary judgment in a CERCLA suit brought by the owner of land where the pipeline is located in West Virginia. The landowner alleged that the pipeline leaked and contaminated her soil and groundwater, and sought to rec...

United States v. Union Oil Co. of California

In an unpublished opinion, the Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the U.S. government in a CERCLA liability lawsuit, requiring oil companies to reimburse approximately $50 million of EPA's environmental cleanup costs at a Superfund site in California. The government had sought reimbursement...

Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Reynolds

A district court granted summary judgment for nonprofit groups in a challenge to an Iowa statute aimed at preventing them from recording images or videos of conditions in slaughterhouses and other animal facilities. The groups argued that the statute impermissibly restricted their First Amendment fr...

Achieving “Some” Upfront Certainty and Resolve in Superfund Settlements

Superfund practitioners are waiting to see whether the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will designate perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonate, two chemicals in the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) group, as CERCLA hazardous substances. Such a designation may lead to selected remedies being modified and further work being required at Superfund sites where remedies were believed to be complete. This Article explores potential future liability by reviewing provisions of the 2021 Remedial Design/Remedial Action (RD/RA) Model Consent Decree.

NextEra Energy Capital Holdings, Inc. v. Lake

The Fifth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part a district court’s dismissal of a lawsuit concerning a 2019 Texas law that allows only owners of existing transmission lines in the state to build, own, or operate new lines that connect to existing lines. A company seeking to enter the state...

Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. v. Regan

The D.C. Circuit vacated a district court's grant of summary judgment to EPA in a challenge to the Agency's approval of a permitting program for coal ash disposal facilities in Oklahoma. Environmental groups challenged EPA’s approval on several grounds under RCRA and the APA, and the district cour...

California River Watch v. Vacaville, City of

The Ninth Circuit reversed a previous ruling that vacated summary judgment for a California city in a RCRA citizen suit brought by an environmental group. The group had argued the city's water wells were contaminated by hexavalent chromium that was in turn transported to city residents through its w...