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

The Trump Administration's Self-Inflicted Problem: Why Repealing CEQ Regulations Will Delay Infrastructure and Energy Development

For the first time in nearly 50 years, following the federal government's recission of CEQ's NEPA implementing regulations on April 11, 2025, there are no governmentwide regulations in place to provide consistent direction to all federal agencies on how to implement the governmentwide procedural obligations established by NEPA. This Comment explains the costs of eliminating the common floor that the CEQ regulations had established for federal agencies conducting the environmental analyses required to comply with NEPA’s statutory mandate, and why those costs need not have been incurred.

Separating Holding From Dicta: Marin Audubon v. FAA

In Marin Audubon Society v. Federal Aviation Administration, a divided panel for the D.C. Circuit cast significant doubt on the continued durability of CEQ’s NEPA regulations, stating that the agency lacked the authority to issue binding regulations governing federal agencies’ compliance with NEPA. This Comment argues that on closer examination of the court’s legal reasoning, these sweeping statements concerning CEQ’s regulatory authority actually amount to nonbinding dicta.

A Treaty Right to Healthy Forests? Using Tribal Fishing Rights to Challenge Timber Sales

Tribes in the Pacific Northwest have faced persistent obstacles to their exercise of treaty fishing rights, most prominently illegal regulation of off-reservation fishing by state governments. As salmon decline, a new frontier is emerging for treaty right violations: environmental degradation. A recent court victory ruled that a series of culverts owned and operated by the state of Washington violated tribal treaty rights to fish for salmonids at their “usual and accustomed” places.

Prescribed Fire in Wilderness Areas in a Post-Chevron World

In order to manage California wilderness areas to preserve their natural and untrammeled character, as required by the Wilderness Act, federal land management agencies should adopt interpretations of the Act that allow prescribed burning and Indigenous cultural burning in areas where it existed pre-colonialism.

Restricting Oil and Gas Leases Through Withdrawals Under OCSLA: Can A President Rescind?

This Comment focuses on energy developments offshore. Part I recognizes OCSLA’s purpose of balancing energy needs with protection of marine animals, coastal beaches, and wetlands. Part II discusses examples of presidential use of OCSLA §12(a) authority to protect (withdraw from leasing) portions of the OCS temporarily or permanently, including challenges to President Biden’s recent withdrawal of the East Coast, West Coast, and part of the Gulf of Mexico and Bering Strait from future oil and gas leases.

Dispelling the Myths of Permitting Reform and Identifying Effective Pathways Forward

Four myths are distorting the national debate over permit reform. First, it is misconceived as a singular issue, with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) at its center. Second, reformers assume that federal reviews and permitting cause most project delays and failures. Third, there is a widespread belief that environmental laws are routinely weaponized against new infrastructure through obstructive litigation. Fourth, critics assert that environmental procedures and standards must be sacrificed to enable timely climate action.

Regulating Shipping of Carbon Dioxide for Sequestration

A number of facilities intended for permanent sequestration of carbon dioxide are being developed in the United States. Several will be located on or near the coast of the Gulf of Mexico, making them easily accessible to ships. Meanwhile, in Europe there is substantial interest in capturing carbon dioxide from industrial operations, but currently inadequate sequestration facilities, and growing interest in shipping carbon dioxide for sequestration in the United States. This Article reviews the main U.S.

Supreme Court Overrules Chevron

On June 28, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, concluding that courts have a constitutional and statutory obligation to exercise their “independent judgment” when deciding whether a federal administrative agency has acted within its statutory authority. As Justice Neil Gorsuch noted in concurrence, the Court’s decision “places a tombstone on Chevron no one can miss.” This Comment discusses the Court’s decision and its implications for legal challenges to federal agency actions.