The coronavirus pandemic, the push for racial justice, and continued efforts to mitigate climate change have emerged as key challenges for corporations. At the center of this trifecta of change are supply chains; onequarter of the global supply chain, approximately $4.5 trillion, could shift by 2025. Leading companies are rebuilding supply chains more resilient to the disruptions caused by climate change and more cognizant of environmental, social, and governance expectations, while prioritizing suppliers that promote racial justice and companies owned by people of color.

President Donald Trump’s environmental policies appear detrimental to the environmental justice (EJ) movement, but little work has been done to test their true impact on EJ. This Article offers a method for evaluating progress (or lack thereof) across the last three presidential administrations, proposing three metrics for progress: access to legal recourse, consideration of climate change as an EJ issue, and signaling actions.

The appropriate use of science in policymaking depends upon integrity in scientific research and in the ways in which that research is communicated and applied throughout the policymaking process. On May 22, 2019, the University of California, Irvine School of Law’s Center for Land, Environment, and Natural Resources (CLEANR) and the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) convened a roundtable that brought together leading scientists, scholars, advocates, and policymakers to explore potential safeguards to protect scientific research and its use in feder

This Article focuses on an area of rapidly evolving jurisprudence—climate liability litigation. It examines in depth the state attorney general’s complaint filed in Rhode Island v. Chevron Corp. in 2018, alleging various state-law tort claims. It explores the intensely sustained legal battles taking place between states and fossil fuel companies over whether federal courts or state courts should have jurisdiction, which in many respects is the “ballgame issue” for both plaintiffs and defendants.

This Article discusses the Trump Administration’s main actions to undermine the role of science in public policy and the consequences for cost-benefit analysis involving climate change policies. It analyzes the specific attacks on science and their impact on relevant policies, namely, the rollbacks of the Clean Water Rule, the pesticides ban, the Clean Air Act, and the Clean Power Plan, as well as modification of the National Environmental Policy Act and regulations promoting fuel efficiency, and the flexibilization of environmental enforcement during the COVID-19 pandemic.

As in prior years, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 contains a variety of provisions setting U.S. Department of Defense priorities for energy, environmental, and natural resource issues. These include measures that represent some degree of consensus on these often-politicized topics.

With the increased risk of flooding due to climate change, potential liability from construction and maintenance of flood control measures is a major consideration governments must consider when planning and building them. This Article discusses how the Supreme Court’s decision in Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States (AGF) laid the groundwork for a new form of takings that the authors term “negligent takings,” increasing the likelihood that the government will be liable after a flooding event.

State wildlife agencies commonly claim they are entitled to manage wildlife under the public trust doctrine (PTD). This assertion is frequently made in judicial proceedings, with state requests that their managerial authority be given due force throughout state, private, federal, and even tribal lands. One might conclude that a rich body of PTD practices and policies exists for wildlife; in reality, the PTD in state wildlife management proves to be ephemeral.

Artificial intelligence (AI) and complex machine learning algorithms have come to play a profound role in many of our day-to-day activities.

The COVID-19 pandemic will have far-reaching and even transformative implications for environmental law.