Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Book reviews (1)
- Climate change (1)
- Connecticut v. American Electric Power Co. (1)
- Cost-benefit analysis (1)
- Emissions (1)
-
- Environment (1)
- Environmental Protection Agency (1)
- Greenhouse gases (1)
- Health-wealth tradeoff (1)
- Justiciability (1)
- Livermore (Michael) (1)
- Nuisances (1)
- Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (1)
- Office of Management and Budget (1)
- Public health (1)
- Public policy (1)
- Rationality (1)
- Regulations (1)
- Revesz (Richard) (1)
- Rulemaking (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Right Issue, The Wrong Branch: Arguments Against Adjudicating Climate Change Nuisance Claims, Matthew Edwin Miller
The Right Issue, The Wrong Branch: Arguments Against Adjudicating Climate Change Nuisance Claims, Matthew Edwin Miller
Michigan Law Review
Climate change is probably today's greatest global environmental threat, posing dire ecological, economic, and humanitarian consequences. In the absence of a comprehensive regulatory scheme to address the problem, some aggrieved Americans have sought relief from climate-related injuries by suing significant emitters of greenhouse gases under a public nuisance theory. Federal district courts have dismissed four such claims, with each court relying at least in part on the political question doctrine of nonjusticiability. However, one circuit court of appeals has reversed to date, finding that the common law cognizes such claims and that the judiciary is competent and compelled to adjudicate …
Rationalism In Regulation, Christopher C. Demuth, Douglas H. Ginsburg
Rationalism In Regulation, Christopher C. Demuth, Douglas H. Ginsburg
Michigan Law Review
Retaking Rationality: How Cost-Benefit Analysis Can Better Protect the Environment and Our Health, by Richard L. Revesz and Michael A. Livermore, aims to convince those who favor more government regulation-in particular environmental groups-that they should embrace cost-benefit analysis and turn it to their purposes. Coauthored by a prominent law school dean and a recent student with a background in environmental advocacy, the book is a jarring combination of roundhouse political polemics and careful academic argument. Sweeping pronouncements are followed by qualifications that leave the sweep of the pronouncements in doubt- rather like the give-and-take of the law school classroom …