Law Commons^™

Slides: Protecting Biodiversity Through Ecosystem Services, Barton "Buzz" Thompson

Shifting Baselines and New Meridians: Water, Resources, Landscapes, and the Transformation of the American West (Summer Conference, June 4-6)

Presenter: Barton “Buzz” Thompson, Perry L. McCarty Director, Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University Law School

14 slides

Slides: "Mitaku Oyasin" Means "We Are All Related", Bob Gough

Shifting Baselines and New Meridians: Water, Resources, Landscapes, and the Transformation of the American West (Summer Conference, June 4-6)

Presenter: Bob Gough, NativeEnergy, Inc.

72 slides

Massachusetts V. U.S. Epa Part Ii: Implications Of The Supreme Court Decision: Hearing Before The H. Select Comm. On Energy Independence And Global Warming, 110th Cong., Mar. 13, 2008 (Statement Of Professor Lisa Heinzerling, Geo. U. L. Center), Lisa Heinzerling

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Massachusetts V. Epa And The Future Of Environmental Standing In Climate Change Litigation And Beyond, Randall S. Abate

Journal Publications

This Article focuses on the future scope of environmental standing after Massachusetts v. EPA. Injury in fact has been and remains the most controversial component of the environmental standing test within and outside the context of global environmental harms. Part I of this Article discusses the background context of environmental standing for global environmental harms and its corresponding origins in procedural and substantive injury claims in cases involving purely domestic environmental harms. Part II examines the landmark decision in Massachusetts v. EPA and considers how it confirms and extends standing jurisprudence for global environmental harms, yet fails to resolve some …

Massachusetts V Epa: Escaping The Common Law's Growing Shadow, Robert V. Percival

Faculty Scholarship

In its first full Term with its newest member, the U.S. Supreme Court marched decidedly to the right with decisions narrowing abortion rights, striking down affirmative action programs, invalidating campaign finance regulations, and making it more difficult for victims of employment discrimination to seek redress. In the face of this rightward shift the most surprising decision of the Term was the Court’s embrace of claims that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had acted unlawfully by refusing to use the Clean Air Act to combat climate change. In Massachusetts v EPA, the Court held that EPA had the authority to …

In Re Annandale And The Disconnections Between Minnesota And Federal Agency Deference Doctrine, Mehmet K. Konar-Steenberg

Faculty Scholarship

This article explores each of these differences between Annandale’s view of deference and comparable federal authority. Part II begins the discussion with an explanation of the somewhat complicated legal and factual background that gave rise to Annandale’s unusually thorny agency deference issues. This section includes an extended discussion of the Annandale administrative record and the reasoning of the Minnesota Court of Appeals and Minnesota Supreme Court. Part III then critically analyzes the Annandale court’s claims to have acted consistently with federal agency deference case law in each of the three areas discussed above. Part IV concludes with some post-Annandale developments …

Hothouse Flowers: The Vices And Virtues Of Climate Federalism, Jonathan H. Adler

Faculty Publications

Federal law preempts state regulation of motor vehicle emissions. California alone is allowed to seek a waiver of such preemption, and unsuccessfully sought such a waiver for the state's regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. The debate and pending litigation over California's effort to obtain a waiver of preemption has focused attention on the state role in climate change policy. This paper explores the role of state governments in developing climate change policy, with a particular focus on how federalism principles and practice should inform judgments about the division of authority between the state and federal governments. As …

Reforming Our Wasteful Hazardous Waste Policy, Jonathan H. Adler

Faculty Publications

Federal hazardous waste regulation and cleanup programs suffer from poor prioritization, insufficient flexibility, high costs, and questionable benefits. Many of these problems are a result of excessive regulatory centralization. With the enactment of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and Comprehensive Emergency Response, Cleanup and Liability Act (CERCLA, aka "Superfund") Congress centralized environmental policy questions that are, in many respects, inherently local in nature. This produced a "mismatch" between those jurisdictions with regulatory primacy and the nature of the environmental problems at issue.

Contamination of soil and groundwater are site-specific, rarely crossing state lines. Due to the local nature …