Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Administrative Sovereignty: Expanding The Scope Of Federal Agency Enforcement Powers In Alaska V. Environmental Protection Agency, Joshua Hill
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Massachusetts V. Environmental Protection Agency, Exploring The Merits Of Greenhouse Gas Regulation, Elise Korican
Massachusetts V. Environmental Protection Agency, Exploring The Merits Of Greenhouse Gas Regulation, Elise Korican
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
The purpose of this case note is to explore the Supreme Court's decision in Massachusetts v. EPA. Part II provides the historical background of global warming, related legislation, the enactment of the Clean Air Act and later amendments, as well as relevant case holdings as to judicial review of agency decisions and implementation of the Clean Air Act. Part III sets out the operative facts of the Massachusetts v. EPA case beginning with the initial rulemaking petition, through the decision of the district court of appeals, and describes the facts as presented to the Supreme Court. Part IV outlines the …
Happy Air!: Strengthening The Role Of Administrative Law In Environmental Enforcement, Erica Bourdon
Happy Air!: Strengthening The Role Of Administrative Law In Environmental Enforcement, Erica Bourdon
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Ruckleshaus V. Sierra Club: Muddying The Waters Of Fee-Shifting In Federal Environmental Litigation , Jeanne A. Taylor
Ruckleshaus V. Sierra Club: Muddying The Waters Of Fee-Shifting In Federal Environmental Litigation , Jeanne A. Taylor
Pepperdine Law Review
In numerous federal environmental statutes, Congress gave plaintiffs the right to recover attorneys' fees when the court finds them "appropriate." In Ruckleshaus v. Sierra Club, the United States Supreme Court held that it was only "appropriate" to grant attorneys' fees when the plaintiff had at least partially prevailed on the merits. The decision ignored both the important role environmental groups play in the interpretation and development of regulatory programs through litigation and the ability of the lower courts to determine when attorneys' fees were "appropriate." The Court, instead, focused on the adversarial nature of such groups and the traditional American …