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

Annapolis, Maryland v. BP P.L.C.

A district court remanded back to state court two climate liability suits brought against oil companies. A city and county in Maryland had sued the companies in state court, alleging they concealed climate-related harms caused by fossil fuels. The companies removed the suits to federal court based o...

Financially Equivalent but Behaviorally Distinct? Pollution Tax and Cap-and-Trade Negotiations

Economic theory suggests that pollution tax and cap-and-trade regulations can be functionally equivalent. Environmentalists tend to prefer the firm emissions cap in cap-and-trade programs, while economists and business interests tend to prefer the price certainty of tax programs. But both may be overlooking behavioral distinctions between the two policies. Using a novel randomized case experiment, this Article tests whether the framing changes negotiated policies.

The Acceleration of Climate Creep: The Court Crashes, Congress Surges

This Comment takes up two recent conflicting developments: the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, which was designed to undercut present and future federal climate action, and Congress’ surprising countermove passing climate legislation in the form of the Inflation Reduction Act, which has dramatically accelerated development of the rule of law around climate change in the United States.

Analyzing West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency

On the final day of the 2021-2022 term, the U.S. Supreme Court released its decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency. The majority (6-3) opinion limited the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants under Clean Air Act §111(d), in part by invoking the “major questions doctrine.” The decision has implications for EPA’s authority both to regulate emissions from stationary sources and to regulate greenhouse gases more broadly.

Conservation Law Foundation, Inc. v. Shell Oil Co.

A district court granted in part and denied in part an oil company's motion to dismiss a CWA and RCRA citizen suit brought by an environmental group. The group alleged 14 counts against the company, arguing it violated the CWA and RCRA by failing to prepare its bulk storage and fuel terminal in New ...

Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Bureau of Land Management

A district court vacated two rights-of-way that BLM issued to a company in 2020 to transport water through an existing gas pipeline across federal lands. Environmental groups sought vacatur, arguing the rights-of-way violated FLPMA, NEPA, and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). BLM agreed...

Agricultural Exceptionalism, Environmental Injustice, and U.S. Right-to-Farm Laws

While the environmental justice movement has gained traction in the United States, the relationship between agri-food systems and environmental injustices in rural areas has yet to come into focus. This Article explores the relationship between U.S. agricultural exceptionalism and rural environmental justice through examining right-to-farm laws.

Rising Tides-Toward a Federal Climate Resilience Fund

Climate impacts in the United States disproportionately fall on low-income communities and communities of color. As the costs of climate adaptation mount, municipalities and states have brought litigation against fossil fuel companies to recover for extensive damage caused by climate change. Drawing on lessons from previous tobacco and asbestos suits, this Article argues that damages litigation—while properly heard in state courts—has significant shortcomings as an equitable climate change adaptation strategy.

Hoboken v. Chevron Corp.

The Third Circuit affirmed two district courts' orders remanding back to start court two climate liability suits bought against oil companies. Delaware and the city of Hoboken sued the companies in state court for state-law torts. The companies removed the suits to federal court, arguing removal was...