Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Litigation Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Environmental Law

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Litigation

Scientific Gerrymandering & Bifurcation, Katrina F. Kuh, Megan Edwards, Frederick A. Mcdonald Apr 2021

Scientific Gerrymandering & Bifurcation, Katrina F. Kuh, Megan Edwards, Frederick A. Mcdonald

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Environmental litigation must often examine the propriety of corporate conduct in areas of scientific complexity. In the second generation of climate nuisance suits, for example, allegations of corporate participation in the climate disinformation campaign are woven into plaintiffs’ claims. Toxic tort suits, currently and most notably in the Roundup and PFAS litigation, present another area of environmental litigation grappling with the legal ramifications of alleged corporate deception about scientific information. Toxic tort suits often surface allegations, and in many cases disturbing evidence, of what we term corporate “scientific gerrymandering”— corporate efforts to finesse, slow, or even mislead scientific understanding of …

Go to article

The Legitimacy Of Judicial Climate Engagement, Katrina Fischer Kuh Oct 2019

The Legitimacy Of Judicial Climate Engagement, Katrina Fischer Kuh

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Courts in key climate change cases have abdicated their constitutional responsibility to protect a prejudiced and disenfranchised group (nonvoting minors and future generations) and remedy an insidious pathology in public discourse and the political process: the industry-funded climate disinformation campaign. This Article posits that this abdication results from courts' uneasiness about displacing the prerogatives of democratically elected bodies. This uneasiness is misplaced. Court engagement with climate cases would strengthen democracy in accord with widely accepted justifications for countermajoritarian judicial review. This Article first describes in detail how courts exhibit a frustrating reticence to accept jurisdiction over cases that present questions …

Go to article

Theme And Variations In Statutory Preclusions Against Successive Environmental Enforcement Actions By Epa And Citizens, Part Two: Statutory Preclusions On Epa Enforcement, Jeffrey G. Miller Jan 2005

Theme And Variations In Statutory Preclusions Against Successive Environmental Enforcement Actions By Epa And Citizens, Part Two: Statutory Preclusions On Epa Enforcement, Jeffrey G. Miller

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This is the second half of a two-part Article focusing on preclusions against successive enforcement of the environmental statutes. Part One of the Article, printed in Volume 28 of this Journal, examined preclusions against citizen suits and argued that because of the theme-and-variations nature of the preclusion language, that language should be read in accordance with its plain meaning. Part Two, published in this issue, studies the restrictions on enforcement actions by the EPA and reaches the same conclusion.

Go to article

Is Voting Necessary? Organization Standing And Non-Voting Members Of Environmental Advocacy Organizations, Karl S. Coplan Jan 2005

Is Voting Necessary? Organization Standing And Non-Voting Members Of Environmental Advocacy Organizations, Karl S. Coplan

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This article will examine the law of standing, and specifically, the conflicting decisions concerning the importance of voting rights in order to establish organizational standing. The article concludes that voting rights should not be essential to the assertion of representational standing. Nevertheless, the article will also consider alternate forms of organization that will improve an organization's chances of establishing representational standing, while addressing the concerns that lead organizations to avoid a voting membership in the first place.

Go to article

Is Citizen Suit Notice Jurisdictional And Why Does It Matter?, Karl S. Coplan Jan 2003

Is Citizen Suit Notice Jurisdictional And Why Does It Matter?, Karl S. Coplan

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The question of whether notice is jurisdictional or not has important ramifications for citizen suit litigation. The characterization of the notice requirement as “jurisdictional” implicates the proper procedure for raising notice objections, the means of curing notice defects, the question of waiver of notice objections, and the timing of raising notice objections. This article will conduct a brief review of the case law concerning the jurisdictional nature (or not) of the notice requirement, a consideration of the as-yet unnoticed impact of Steel Co. on the issue, and a discussion of the procedural and litigation ramifications of characterizing the notice element …

Go to article

Direct Environmental Standing For Chartered Conservation Corporations, Karl S. Coplan Jan 2001

Direct Environmental Standing For Chartered Conservation Corporations, Karl S. Coplan

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This article suggests that, as an antidote to the ever-tightening restrictions on individual environmental standing, a state may charter a not-for-profit corporation organized to protect a particular environmental resource, giving the corporation a non-exclusive portion of the State's interest in enforcing applicable environmental protections. The dichotomy between not-for-profit organizations that may litigate only as the representative of individual members' interests, and business corporations that assert their own direct economic interests, may seem natural to our late-twentieth-century sensibility, but is not founded in original intent. The framers of Article III, which grants jurisdiction over “cases and controversies” to the federal courts, …

Go to article

Refracting The Spectrum Of Clean Water Act Standing In Light Of Lujan V. Defenders Of Wildlife, Karl S. Coplan Jan 1997

Refracting The Spectrum Of Clean Water Act Standing In Light Of Lujan V. Defenders Of Wildlife, Karl S. Coplan

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

First, this article will review the impetus and purposes for the Clean Water Act of 1972, including its citizen suit provision, particularly as these purposes relate to the elimination of specific harm or causation requirements in enforcement actions under its provisions. Second, this article will briefly review the basic elements of Article III standing requirements as enunciated by the Supreme Court, and the development of Supreme Court standing doctrine in environmental cases leading up to and including the Defenders of Wildlife decision. Then the article will survey the various approaches courts have taken in applying Article III standing doctrine to …

Go to article