Law Commons^™

Major Questions (And Answers): A Call To Quiet The Quartet, Michael Reaves

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This Comment calls for action to quiet the Quartet—encouraging executive agencies to mitigate the pernicious impact of MQD. In Part I, this Comment discusses the political landscape in the area of climate action. Part II wades through the nearly forty-year doctrinal shift of delegation—from humble beginnings in a law review article from then-Judge Breyer in 1986, to the application of major questions principles at various stages of agency-deference analyses. Part III discusses the Quartet and its role in MQD as a determinative legal canon. Recent scholarship calls into question if there are multiple iterations of MQD, and whether the most …

Environmental And Natural Resources Law Symposium: Assessing The August 2023 Amendments To The Waters Of The United States Rule In The Wake Of Sackett V. Epa, Ryan Day

Maurer Law Events

In 1982, the Army Corps of Engineers adopted the EPA definition of “waters of the United States.” This brought an end to a smoldering interagency conflict over the definitions under the Clean Water Act. This relationship was formalized with a 1989 Memorandum of Agreement between the EPA and the Corps; the Corps has largely ceded definitional decision making to the EPA, which develops guidance and supporting materials, while the Corps is responsible for most case-specific jurisdictional determinations under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. In 2023, the agencies embarked on their latest round of rulemaking. In January, the Biden …

The Rule Of Five Guys, Lisa Heinzerling

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Rule of Five: Making Climate History at the Supreme Court. by Richard J. Lazarus.

Presidential Progress On Climate Change: Will The Courts Interfere With What Needs To Be Done To Save Our Planet?, Michael B. Gerrard

Faculty Scholarship

The Biden Administration is undertaking numerous actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition away from fossil fuels as part of the fight against climate change. Many of these actions are likely to be challenged in court. This paper describes the various legal theories that are likely to be used in these challenges, assesses their prospects of success given the current composition of the Supreme Court, and suggests ways to minimize the risks.

The Rise And Fall Of Clean Air Act Climate Policy, Nathan Richardson

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

The Clean Air Act has proven to be one of the most successful and durable statutes in American law. After the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, there was great hope that the Act could be brought to bear on climate change, the most pressing current environmental challenge of our time. Massachusetts was fêted as the most important environmental case ever decided, and, upon it, the Environmental Protection Agency under President Obama built a sweeping program of greenhouse gas regulations, aimed first at emissions from road vehicles, and later at fossil fuel power plants. It was the most …

Pepperdine University School Of Law Legal Summaries, Matthew Rollin, Kelly Vollmer

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Fmc Corp. V. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Seth T. Bonilla

Public Land & Resources Law Review

In 1998, FMC Corporation agreed to submit to the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes’ permitting processes, including the payment of fees, for clean-up work required as part of consent decree negotiations with the Environmental Protection Agency. Then, in 2002, FMC refused to pay the Tribes under a permitting agreement entered into by both parties, even though the company continued to store hazardous waste on land within the Shoshone-Bannock Fort Hall Reservation in Idaho. FMC challenged the Tribes’ authority to enforce the $1.5 million permitting fees first in tribal court and later challenged the Tribes’ authority to exercise civil regulatory and adjudicatory jurisdiction over …

Litigating Epa Rules: A Fifty-Year Retrospective Of Environmental Rulemaking In The Courts, Cary Coglianese, Daniel E. Walters

All Faculty Scholarship

Over the last fifty years, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has found itself repeatedly defending its regulations before federal judges. The agency’s engagement with the federal judiciary has resulted in prominent Supreme Court decisions, such as Chevron v. NRDC and Massachusetts v. EPA, which have left a lasting imprint on federal administrative law. Such prominent litigation has also fostered, for many observers, a longstanding impression of an agency besieged by litigation. In particular, many lawyers and scholars have long believed that unhappy businesses or environmental groups challenge nearly every EPA rule in court. Although some empirical studies have …

From Chevron To Consent Of The Governed, David Schoenbrod

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Balancing Economic Growth And Air Pollution: Prevention Of Significant Deterioration And The Protection Of Florida's Future, Enola R. Tobi

Florida State University Journal of Land Use and Environmental Law

This Article researches the history of the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program of the Clean Air Act, which serves to protect air quality in areas of the nation where the air is cleaner than the national ambient air quality standards. The Article also attempts to align the goals of the PSD program with those of the State of Florida, and proposes a system of administration that would accomplish these goals with the fewest restrictions. Finally, the Article analyzes the present methods adopted by other states, as well as those proposed by economists, industry members and environmentalists.

Asarco Llc V. Atlantic Richfield Company, Ryan L. Hickey

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabiltiy Act, commonly known as CERCLA, facilitates cleanup of hazardous waste sites and those contaminated by other harmful substances by empowering the Environmental Protection Agency to identify responsible parties and require them to undertake or fund remediation. Because pollution sometimes occurrs over long periods of time by multiple parties, CERCLA also enables polluters to seek financial contribution from other contaminators of a particular site. The Ninth Circuit clarified the particuar circumstances under which contribution actions may arise in Asarco LLC v. Atlantic Richfield Co., holding non-CERCLA settlements may give rise to CERCLA contribution …

Indeconstructible: The Triumph Of The Environmental “Administrative State”, Stephen M. Johnson

Articles

Shortly after the 2017 Presidential inauguration, a senior advisor to the President proclaimed that a top priority of the Administration would be the “deconstruction of the administrative state.” A primary target of the Administration’s deconstruction efforts was the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and federal environmental regulations.

While the President can use a variety of tools, including the appointment power, budget power, treaty power, and executive orders, to influence the manner in which the EPA and other agencies interpret and enforce laws, the President has very little power to unilaterally “deconstruct the administrative state.” The “administrative state” is a creation …

The Brand-X Effect: Declining Chevron Deference In The 21st Century, Stephen Johnson

Articles

Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. is the most frequently cited Supreme Court administrative law decision and has generated substantial scholarship over the past thirty-four ears. Almost three decades ago, Robert Glicksman and Christopher Schroeder examined the nature of judicial review of the actions of the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") by the federal courts during the agency's first twenty years of existence, focusing, in part, on the changing nature of that review in light of the Chevron decision. Glicksman and Schroeder concluded that the courts aggressively reviewed EPA's actions during the agency's early years, interpreting the …

Opening The Gates Of Cow Palace: Regulating Runoff Manure As A Hazardous Waste Under Rcra, Reed J. Mccalib

Michigan Law Review

In 2015, a federal court held for the first time that the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) may regulate runoff manure as a “solid waste” under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”). The holding of Community Ass’n for Restoration of the Environment, Inc. v. Cow Palace, LLC opened the gates to regulation of farms under the nation’s primary toxic waste statute. This Comment argues that, once classified as a “solid waste,” runoff manure fits RCRA’s definition of “hazardous waste” as well. This reclassification would expand EPA’s authority to monitor and respond to the nation’s tragically common groundwater-contamination emergencies.

Clean Air Council V. Pruitt, Oliver Wood

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia granted a motion for summary vacatur against the Environmental Protection Agency after environmental groups challenged the agency’s reconsideration of the Obama-era methane rule under the Clean Air Act. The court held that the EPA unlawfully issued a stay after it reconsidered the rule without proper authorization. The court vacated the EPA’s stay, one example of the Trump Administration unsuccessfully repealing Obama-era rulemaking.

Energy-Water Nexus, The Clean Power Plan, And Integration Of Water Resource Concerns Into Energy Decision-Making, Sarah Ladin

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

Energy regulation in the United States is now at a crossroads. The EPA has begun the process to officially repeal the Clean Power Plan and currently has no plan to replace it with new rulemaking to regulate carbon emissions from the U.S. energy sector. Even though the Clean Power Plan is more or less at its end, its regulatory structure stands as a model of the way decision-makers in the United States regulate the energy sector and the environment. Since the beginning of the modern environmental legal system, decision-makers have chosen to silo the system. Statutes and agencies focus on …

Technology-Based? Cost Factoring In U.S. Environmental Standards, Jamison E. Colburn

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

Environmental controls in the United States are often said to be “technology-based” because the polluter’s duties are determined by the available technology for controlling that pollution rather than by the social costs and benefits of doing so. Indeed, this is much of what distinguishes U.S. environmental law post-1970 from that which preceded it. But technology-based standards have in fact weighed the costs of controlling pollution in unique, often obscure ways, yielding an analysis that defies standardization and basic notions of transparency. Often lumped under an umbrella heading called “feasibility” analysis and justified on the grounds that it avoids many of …

Pepperdine University School Of Law: Legal Summaries, Jane Seo

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition V. Fola Coal Company, Llc, Emily A. Slike

Public Land & Resources Law Review

Disregarding CWA regulations, WVDEP allowed for a state coal mining company, Fola, to discharge pollutants into the Stillhouse Branch without regard for water quality violations. Fola claimed that because it held a WV/NPDES permit, it was shielded from any liability so long as the company followed the permit’s provisions, even if its discharge violated CWA water quality standards.

Whose Standards Control? Maine V. Mccanhy And The Federal, State, And Tribal Battle Over Water Quality Regulation, Joseph Paul Mortelliti

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

This Note considers the longstanding clash between the United States government and state governments over the management of intrastate waters through the lens of Maine v. McCarthy, an ongoing federal lawsuit. McCarthy confronts whether the United States Environmental Protection Agency can require state water quality standards to specifically safeguard the health and cultural practices of Maine’s Indian tribes, particularly sustenance fishing. A panoply of legal and political factors gave rise to and shaped the course of the litigation, ranging from tribal sovereignty to agency discretion and political gamesmanship. After evaluating the litigants’ arguments and examining previous regulatory collisions between …

Agency Motivations In Exercising Discretion, David L. Markell

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

The Battle Over U.S. Water: Why The Clean Water Rule "Flows" Within The Bounds Of Supreme Court Precedent, Ashleigh Allione

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Water, Water Everywhere, But Just How Much Is Clean?: Examining Water Quality Restoration Efforts Under The United States Clean Water Act And The United States-Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, Jill T. Hauserman

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Major Questions About The "Major Questions" Doctrine, Kevin O. Leske

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

After over a decade of hibernation, the United States Supreme Court has awoken the “major questions” doctrine, which has re-emerged in an expanded form. Under the doctrine, a court will not defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statutory provision in circumstances where the case involves an issue of deep economic or political significance or where the interpretive question could effectuate an enormous and transformative expansion of the agency’s regulatory authority. While the doctrine’s re-emergence in recent Supreme Court cases has already raised concerns, a subtle shift in its application has gone unnoticed. Unlike in earlier cases, where the Court …

Pepperdine University School Of Law: Legal Summaries, Blair Castellanos

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

The Private Causes Of Action Under Cercla: Navigating The Intersection Of Sections 107(A) And 113(F), Jeffrey M. Gaba

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

The Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) provides three distinct “private” causes of action that allow parties to recover all or part of their cleanup costs from “potentially responsible parties.” Section 107(a)(4)(B) provides a “direct” right of cost recovery. Sections 113(f)(1) and 113(f)(3)(B) provide a right of contribution following a CERCLA civil action or certain judicial or administrative settlements. The relationship among these causes of action has been the source of considerable confusion. Two Supreme Court cases, Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Aviall Services, Inc. and United States v. Atlantic Research Corp. have identified certain situations in which the …

Implementing A Carbon Tax In Florida Under The Clean Power Plan: Policy Considerations, Chris Hastings

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Slides: Moffat Collection System Project, Travis Bray

Innovations in Managing Western Water: New Approaches for Balancing Environmental, Social and Economic Outcomes (Martz Summer Conference, June 11-12)

Presenter: Travis Bray, Project Manager, Moffat Collection System Project, Denver Water

45 slides

Unpacking Eme Homer: Cost, Proportionality, And Emissions Reductions, Daniel A. Farber

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

Interstate air pollution can prevent even the most diligent downwind state from attaining the air quality levels required by federal law. Allocating responsibility for emissions cuts when multiple upwind states contribute to downwind air quality violations presents a particularly difficult problem. Justice Ginsburg’s opinion for the Court in EPA v. EME Homer City Generator, L.P., gives EPA broad discretion to craft regulatory solutions for this problem. Although the specific statutory provision at issue was deceptively simple, the underlying problem was especially complex because of the large number of states involved. Indeed, neither the majority opinion nor the dissent seems to …

Instrument Choice, Carbon Emissions, And Information, Michael Wara

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

This Article examines the consequences of a previously unrecognized difference between pollutant cap-and-trade schemes and pollution taxes. Implementation of cap-and-trade relies on a forecast of future emissions, while implementation of a pollution tax does not. Realistic policy designs using either regulatory instrument almost always involve a phase-in over time to avoid economic disruption. Cap-and-trade accomplishes this phase-in via a limit on emissions that falls gradually below the forecast of future pollutant emissions. Emissions taxation accomplishes the same via a gradually increasing levy on pollution. Because of the administrative complexity of establishing an emissions trading market, cap-and-trade programs typically require between …