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.

Ictech-Bendeck v. Waste Connections Bayou, Inc.

A district court held that hundreds of Louisiana residents seeking damages in a mass tort action concerning landfill emissions in Jefferson Parish established general causation. The court found the residents proved by a preponderance of the evidence that gases and odors were emitted from the landfil...

Louisiana v. Department of Commerce

A district court granted summary judgment for NMFS in a challenge to a 2019 rule requiring turtle excluder devices on skimmer trawl vessels greater than 40 feet in length in inshore waters. The final rule was published on December 20, 2019, with an effective date of April 1, 2021, but NMFS issued a ...

Swartz v. Coca-Cola Co.

A district court granted bottling companies' motion to dismiss a deceptive marketing challenge to their "100% recyclable" labels. Consumers and an environmental group argued the labels were false and misleading because most plastic bottles are not recycled. The companies moved to dismiss for lack of...

Liability for Public Deception: Linking Fossil Fuel Disinformation to Climate Damages

Over two dozen U.S. states and municipalities have filed lawsuits against fossil fuel companies, seeking abatement orders and compensation for climate damages based on theories such as public nuisance, negligence, and failure to warn, and alleging these companies knew about the dangers of their products, intentionally concealed those dangers, created doubt about climate science, and undermined public support for climate action.

Too Little Too Late: Underregulation of Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Underregulation is a common and persistent environmental law problem, with recent scholarly focus on individual contaminants of emerging concern (CECs), whose harm is not fully known. But little attention has been given to the general trend of underregulation with respect to these chemicals, or explaining why this systematic underregulation occurs. This Article posits that federal agencies have been unacceptably slow to initiate protective regulations, and even once regulations are promulgated, they leave regulatory gaps that continue to expose populations to harmful effects.

The Past, Present, and Future of Women in Environmental Law

The field of environmental law has seen many changes over the years, with demonstrable legal and policy victories for cleaner air and water. While the face of the environmental movement in its beginnings was predominantly male, women have become more prominent and influential within environmental law and policy over the decades.

District of Columbia v. Exxon Mobil Corp.

A district court granted the District of Columbia's motion to remand to state court a consumer protection lawsuit against energy companies. The District sued in state court, arguing the companies knowingly misrepresented the effects of fossil fuel products to consumers through misleading advertiseme...

Green Valley Investors, LLC v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

The U.S. Tax Court granted in part four North Carolina partnerships' cross-motion for summary judgment in a challenge to penalties the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) sought to impose on them for charitable deductions in tax years 2014 and 2015 related to syndicated conservation easement transactions...