This paper explicates the four building blocks underlying emission standard guidelines in the U.S. EPA's proposed clean power plan for reducing carbon dioxide emissions from the U.S. electric power sector. It critically analyzes the methodology by which EPA has assessed the cost and effectiveness of each building block. This explication of the four building blocks reveals that the clean power plan is fundamentally inconsistent with how Congress has allocated state versus the federal regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act. Under the CAA vision of federalism, the federal EPA's presumed centralized expertise in matters of climate change policy would be coupled with a productive delegation of authority to state regulators to utilize their superior knowledge of state power sectors in finding ways to reduce CO2 emissions. Under the clean power plan, the EPA has set state-specific CO2 emission reduction targets on the basis of the stylized facts of estimated average state performance. Thus rather than standards based on federal expertise, implemented by state regulators with state-specific knowledge, the clean power plan sets standards based on federal guesswork about state realities that may leave state regulators with few feasible or cost effective compliance options.
The Environmental Law and Community Engagement Clinic at the University of Virginia School of Law filed this amicus brief on behalf of San Bernardino...
Gradualism should have won out in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, exerting gravitational influence on the majority and dissenters alike. In general...
On December 15, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued its decision in Illumina, Inc. v. FTC. Although the court vacated and...
On January 17, the Supreme Court heard arguments in what are potentially the most significant commercial law cases of the last decade. In the...
There is a live debate going on over whether antitrust should take a broader view of the economics of market concentration. When antitrust reformers...
This casebook aspires to help students understand and think systematically about the techniques of statutory interpretation. It blends exposition with...
In an era defined by partisan rifts and government gridlock, many celebrate the rare issues that prompt bipartisan consensus. But extreme consensus...
On Aug. 14, a Montana district court released a groundbreaking decision for climate change activists. In Held v. Montana, the court announced that...
This article discusses the links between climate and debt sustainability by focusing on how climate mitigation and adaptation are paid for, and who...
The 1968 Fair Housing Act required local government recipients of federal money to take meaningful actions to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH...
Environmentalists are frustrated that President Joe Biden agreed to greenlight the controversial Mountain Valley Pipeline, or MVP, as part of the...
The question whether the term “set aside” in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) authorizes a federal court to vacate a rule universally—as opposed...
The issue of state separation of powers generally is not one that the federal courts have had much occasion to address. Recent issues have arisen...
On May 25, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court dropped an absolute bombshell with its ruling in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency. Early assessments...
The Supreme Court’s new term begins on the first Monday of October. But before delving into the most important environmental case yet to be heard, it...