Between January 2020 and March 2023, U.S. electronic cigarette sales grew 43%, from 15.6 million devices per month to 22.4 million devices. During this time frame, the portion of sales comprising disposable devices grew from 4 million to 11.9 million per month. The impact upon the environment has been largely overlooked by policymakers.

Plastic pollution is emerging as a defining crisis of our time. The United States has set a national goal to eliminate plastic release into the environment by 2040 and is engaging in negotiations on a global plastics treaty while simultaneously developing a national strategy. A recent report published by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) and the Monterey Bay Aquarium provides a comprehensive overview of existing legal authorities the federal government can leverage to achieve this national goal while safeguarding human health and the environment.

The U.S. Supreme Court's October Term 2022 had major implications for environmental law, including its most significant Clean Water Act decision ever. Upcoming cases in October Term 2023 have the potential to be just as impactful. On September 25, 2023, the Environmental Law Institute hosted a panel of experts who provided an overview of key rulings and major take-aways from the Court’s prior term, and discussed cases that have been granted review or are likely to be considered by the justices in the upcoming term.

This Article explores the relationship between state environmental citizen suit provisions and judicial standing requirements, and analyzes whether the introduction of citizen suits into state statutory law inspired increasingly strict state standing requirements, as occurred at the federal level. Specifically, it identifies how state judiciaries have interpreted standing and aggrievement in response to general, non-media-specific citizen suit provisions, both in the common law and in administrative law.

The Trump Administration has aggressively rolled back prior administrations’ environmental regulations and natural resource policies, and critics of this agenda have turned to the judiciary. A remarkable string of federal court decisions has faulted the Administration for failing to follow the standard for agency policy change articulated in Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, Inc.

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Clean Water Act (CWA), and the Clean Air Act (CAA) represent federal regulatory regimes for protecting the environment. Although each statute initially places administrative responsibility in the hands of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), each encourages states, to varying degrees, to take primary responsibility for implementing the statutory regime.

In Environmental Federalism Part 1: The History of Overfiling Under RCRA, the CWA, and the CAA Prior to Harmon, Smithfield, and CLEAN, the history of judicial and administrative decisions relating to overfiling under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Clean Water Act (CWA), and the Clean Air Act (CAA) was analyzed. The history showed that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with limited exceptions, generally was understood to have overfiling authority under RCRA, the CWA, and the CAA. The limited exceptions focused on two situations.

Editors' Summary: This past summer, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its decision in Ohio Forestry Ass'n v. Sierra Club, 118 S. Ct. 1665, 28 ELR 21119 (1998). The Court held that an environmental group's challenge to a U.S. Forest Service land and resource management plan for the Wayne National Forest in Ohio was not ripe for review. This Article examines how this decision affects the rules for judicial review of national forest plans.

While the Republican's Contract With America has disappeared from the political landscape, many of its ideas continue to percolate in the 105th Congress. Development interests continue to promote federal legislation to expand opportunities for "takings" claims against the government. Through such takings claims developers or private landowners seek to be compensated for not polluting or not building on protected land.

In late 1996, the Tulane Environmental Law Clinic (the Clinic) took on representation of a community group called St. James Citizens for Jobs and the Environment in a controversial challenge to Shintech Inc.'s proposed construction of a polyvinyl chloride plant in Convent, Louisiana. After the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) granted a petition to veto the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality's issuance of an air permit to Shintech, Shintech changed its plans and located a downsized facility elsewhere in Louisiana.