Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Federal agencies (3)
- Pollution (3)
- Regulation (3)
- United States Supreme Court (3)
- Air pollution (2)
-
- Air quality (2)
- Clean Air Act (2)
- Emissions (2)
- Environmental Protection Agency (2)
- Greenhouse gases (2)
- Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent (1)
- American Electric Power v. Connecticut (1)
- Carbon dioxide (1)
- Causes of action (1)
- Chevron v. Natural Resources Defence Council (1)
- Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council (1)
- Clean Water Act (1)
- Cleanups (1)
- Climate change (1)
- Compensation (1)
- Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (1)
- Congress (1)
- Contamination (1)
- Cooper Industries Inc. v. Aviall Services Inc. (1)
- Cost recovery (1)
- Damages (1)
- Decision making (1)
- Deference (1)
- Delegation (1)
- Discretion (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Private Causes Of Action Under Cercla: Navigating The Intersection Of Sections 107(A) And 113(F), Jeffrey M. Gaba
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 …
Fun With Administrative Law: A Game For Lawyers And Judges, Adam Babich
Fun With Administrative Law: A Game For Lawyers And Judges, Adam Babich
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
The practice of law is not a game. Administrative law in particular can implicate important issues that impact people’s health, safety, and welfare and change business’ profitability or even viability. Nonetheless, it can seem like a game. This is because courts rarely explain administrative law rulings in terms of the public purposes and policies at issue in lawsuits. Instead, the courts’ administrative law opinions tend to turn on arcane interpretive doctrines with silly names, such as the “Chevron two-step” or “Chevron step zero.” To advance doctrinal arguments, advocates and courts engage in linguistic debates that resemble a smokescreen—tending to obscure …
Unpacking Eme Homer: Cost, Proportionality, And Emissions Reductions, Daniel A. Farber
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 …
Too Many Cooks In The Climate Change Kitchen: The Case For An Administrative Remedy For Damages Caused By Increased Greenhouse Gas Concentrations, Benjamin Reese
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
Recent federal and state court decisions have made clear that federal common law claims against emitters of greenhouse gases are not sustainable; however, those same courts seem to have given state common law tort claims the green light, at least if the claims are brought in the state where the polluters are located. This Note contends that such suits are not an adequate remedy for those injured by climate change because they will face nearly insurmountable barriers in state court, and because there are major policy-level drawbacks to relying on state tort law rather than a federal solution. This Note …