Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 601 (1)
- 602 (1)
- Administrative Complaints (1)
- Agencies (1)
- Agency Guidance (1)
-
- Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living (1)
- Civil Rights Act (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Disparate Impacts (1)
- Environment (1)
- Environmental Justice (1)
- Environmental justice (1)
- Equal Protection Clause (1)
- Hagan (1)
- Minority (1)
- Private right of action (1)
- Regulations (1)
- Sandoval (1)
- Seif (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Third Circuit (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Environmental Justice And Title Vi: Making Recipient Agencies Justify Their Siting Decisions, Bradford Mank
Environmental Justice And Title Vi: Making Recipient Agencies Justify Their Siting Decisions, Bradford Mank
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
Title VI prohibits federal agencies from providing funds to state or local agencies that discriminate. Environmental justice advocates have filed over fifty Title VI complaints with the EPA alleging that state or local environmental agencies have granted permits that will cause disparate impacts against minority groups. In February 1998, the EPA promulgated an Interim Guidance on Title VI to help the agency resolve these complaints. A wide range of state and local officials has criticized the Guidance because its vague definition of "disparate impact" may give the EPA too much discretion to find discrimination. This Article demonstrates, however, that the …
Is There A Private Cause Of Action Under Epa's Title Vi Regulations?: The Need To Empower Environmental Justice Plaintiffs, Bradford Mank
Is There A Private Cause Of Action Under Epa's Title Vi Regulations?: The Need To Empower Environmental Justice Plaintiffs, Bradford Mank
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
This article will apply the Chester three-factor test to find a private right of action implied in the administrative regulations promulgated by various agencies to implement Section 602 of Title VI. This article also proposes that it would be inconsistent to apply today's more stringent standard for inferring congressional intent in deciding whether a private right exists under Section 602. Such inconsistency arises as a result of the Supreme Court's application of a more lenient standard in recognizing a private right of action under Section 601.