Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Defendants Win "Round One" Of Climate Change Litigation In United States Supreme Court, Richard O. Faulk, John S. Gray
Defendants Win "Round One" Of Climate Change Litigation In United States Supreme Court, Richard O. Faulk, John S. Gray
Richard Faulk
In American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut (“AEP”), the United States Supreme Court held that federal common law public nuisance claims seeking injunctive relief against emitters of greenhouse gases (“GHG”) were displaced by the Clean Air Act (“CAA”) and EPA’s regulatory implementation of the Act’s provisions. In hindsight, this holding seems an inevitable outgrowth of Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497 (2007), which held that GHGs are pollutants subject to CAA regulation. Building on that precedent in a unanimous 8-0 opinion, the AEP Court gave the defendant utility companies a clear-cut victory by precluding judicial direct regulation of GHG through …
Uncommon Law: Ruminations On Public Nuisance, Richard O. Faulk
Uncommon Law: Ruminations On Public Nuisance, Richard O. Faulk
Richard Faulk
The ancient common tort of public nuisance is one of the most highly visible issues in modern tort jurisprudence. Its growth is particularly notable in climate change and environmental litigation, where it seems to be the “tort of choice” for plaintiffs seeking breathtakingly broad relief from global warming and trans-border pollution. Traditionally limited to local concerns, the tort now aspires to global dimensions, and its expanding scope has attracted review by the United States Supreme Court. If its advocates succeed, the “monster that will devour in one gulp the entire law of torts” may be afforded a prime seat at …