Law Commons^™

U.S. Supreme Court Environmental Cases 2008-2009: A Year Like No Other, James R. May

James R. May

The author of this article says the last term of the U.S. Supreme Court was in many respects like no other in modern environmental law. During the 2008-2009 term, the Supreme Court ruled on novel and important questions concerning preliminary injunctions under the National Environmental Policy Act; cost-benefit analyses and permitting under the Clean Water Act; arranger and joint and several liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; and environmental standing. At no turn, says the author, did the court favor the environment over other interests. He says the court even reached down to reverse decisions in …

Vindicating Fundamental Environmental Rights: Judicial Acceptance Of Constitutionally Entrenched Environmental Rights, James May, Erin Daly

Erin Daly

This article examines the extent to which constitutionally embedded fundamental environmental rights have met the promise of ensuring a right to an adequate environment. It explains these results and suggests ways to neutralize judicial resistance to these emerging constitutional rights. In Part II we explain the prevalence of constitutionally entrenched rights to a quality environment. In Part III, we provide examples of the extent to which courts have enforced these provisions. In Part IV, we examine institutional and structural factors, conceptual disjunctions, and pragmatic considerations that help to explain judicial receptivity to constitutionally entrenched environmental rights. And in Part V …

Rights, Remedies And Facial Challenges, Maya Manian

Maya Manian

This brief comment extends upon a key point raised by Caitlin Borgmann’s article, Holding Legislatures Constitutionally Accountable Through Facial Challenges, which argues in part that the Roberts Court takes an outcome-driven approach to facial challenges. Building on Borgmann’s analysis, this comment further suggests that the Court not only manipulates the law in an outcome determinative manner, but also exploits the rules regarding the use of as-applied and facial challenges as a means to rewrite substantive law without having to openly overrule prior precedent. This comment focuses on Gonzales v. Carhart as an illustration of the Roberts Courts’ manipulation of procedural …

Vindicating Fundamental Environmental Rights: Judicial Acceptance Of Constitutionally Entrenched Environmental Rights, James R. May, Erin Daly

James R. May

This article examines the extent to which constitutionally embedded fundamental environmental rights have met the promise of ensuring a right to an adequate environment. It explains these results and suggests ways to neutralize judicial resistance to these emerging constitutional rights. In Part II we explain the prevalence of constitutionally entrenched rights to a quality environment. In Part III, we provide examples of the extent to which courts have enforced these provisions. In Part IV, we examine institutional and structural factors, conceptual disjunctions, and pragmatic considerations that help to explain judicial receptivity to constitutionally entrenched environmental rights. And in Part V …

The Irrational Woman: Informed Consent And Abortion Decision-Making, Maya Manian

Maya Manian

In Gonzales v. Carhart, the Supreme Court upheld a federal ban on a type of second-trimester abortion that many physicians believe is safer for their patients. Carhart presented a watershed moment in abortion law, because it marks the Supreme Court’s first use of the anti-abortion movement’s “woman-protective” rationale to uphold a ban on abortion and the first time since Roe v. Wade that the Court denied women a health exception to an abortion restriction. The woman-protective rationale asserts that banning abortion promotes women’s mental health. According to Carhart, the State should make the final decisions about pregnant women’s healthcare, because …

Constitutional Law And The Future Of Natural Resource Protection, James R. May

James R. May

This is a chapter of a recently published book that examines how constitutional law shapes natural resources law in the United States. Following a brief background, part I identifies and discusses the various constitutional law developments affecting the scope of Congress’s power to regulate the use of natural resources. It focuses primarily on the Commerce Clause (in conjunction with the corresponding case study) and the concomitant extrinsic limits on such authority, including principles of federalism and the Tenth Amendment, as well as the diminished Nondelegation doctrine. Part II does the same for state authority and the dormant Commerce and Supremacy …

Police Paternalism: Community Caretaking, Assistance Searches, And Fourth Amendment Reasonableness, Michael R. Dimino

Michael R Dimino

The Intersection Of Constitutional Law And Environmental Litigation, James R. May

James R. May

The U.S. Constitution propels the majority of environmental litigation. Thirty years ago, constitutional issues seldom arose in environmental law. Nowadays, nearly two in three federal environmental, energy and land use cases are litigated on constitutional grounds. Such cases implicate approximately twenty constitutional principles involving federalism, separation of powers and individual rights. Constitutional issues in environmental litigation are torn from the headlines, from climate change to natural resource extraction. Accordingly, this chapter aims to contextualize constitutional litigation for environmental lawyers in five ways. Part One provides a brief background to environmental litigation in the United States. Part Two addresses how constitutional …