Clean Air Act (CAA)
Federal Versus State Environmental Protection Standards: Can a National Policy Be Implemented Locally? (TOC)
Author
ABA Standing Committee on Environmental Law
Author Bios (long)

Copyright © 1991. American Bar Association. This conference report was produced by the ABA Standing Committee on Environmental Law with the assistance of the Environmental Law Reporter. It is printed with permission and is separately published by the Standing Committee. The views set out in this report have not been approved by the ABA House of Delegates and do not constitute the position of the American Bar Association. ISBN No. 0-89707-603-6. Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 91-70874.

Date
January 1992
Volume
22
Issue
1
Page
10009
Type
Articles
Summary

Keynote Presentation: Making the Partnership Work

Panel Discussion: Regulation of Nuclear Materials

Regulation of Air Quality

Regulation of Water Quality: Is EPA Meeting Its Oblilgations or Can the States Better Meet Water Quality Challenges?

Regulating Solid and Hazardous Wastes

<i>Garamendi</i>'s Unspoken Assumptions: Assessing Executive Foreign Affairs Preemption Challenges to State Regulation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Author
Kimberly Breedon
Author Bios (long)

Kimberly Breedon is a 2007 graduate of the University of Cincinnati College of Law. She would like to thank Prof. Bradford C. Mank for his help and guidance. This Article received an Honorable Mention in the Environmental Law Institute's 2007 Endangered Environmental Laws writing competition.

Date
December 2008
Volume
37
Issue
12
Page
10897
Type
Articles
Summary

Editor's Summary: In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its most recent pronouncement on the executive foreign affairs preemption doctrine in American Insurance Ass'n v. Garamendi. In this Article, Kimberly Breedon argues that lower courts are prone to overbroad applications of Garamendi because the Court assumed the presence of three elements when it developed the standard for executive foreign affairs preemption of state law: (1) formal source law; (2) nexus to a foreign entity; and (3) indication of intent by the executive to preempt the state law under challenge. She concludes that unless these three elements are present, courts need not even reach the question of whether a law is preempted under the Garamendi test.

You must be an ELI Member to access the full content.

You are not logged in. To access this content: