The Justice Department is wasting no time seeking to put this zombie litigation out of its misery, and the plaintiffs are not happy about it.
In some cases, the city is also requiring homeowners to pay to replace trees that squashed their houses.
Will Judge Aiken finally accede to the law and allow this particular climate case to end?
The Fish and Wildlife Service inexplicably removes a species from its tally of species "delisted" under the Endangered Species Act.
Only one justice indicated any interest in premature consideration of state-law climate change lawsuits.
The United Federation of Teachers argues that the near-5,000 page environmental report on New York's congestion pricing plan isn't thorough enough.
Judge Aiken's reckless defiance of legal rules is turning the "Kids Climate Case" into a zombie climate case.
Claims of the Act's success at recovering imperiled species are vastly overstated, especially on private land.
The former Attorney General disagrees with me on whether state and local government climate change lawsuits belong in federal court.
Yet another federal circuit court of appeals rejects energy company removal claims.
The justices are considering whether to grant certiorari in Minnesota's lawsuit against energy companies.
Plus: A listener asks for the editors’ advice on how to spend his money.
New York officials have primarily pitched congestion tolls as an easy cash grab for the city's subway system. New Jersey drivers and politicians aren't happy about that.
The Clean Water Act decision was a unanimous win for the Sacketts, and a 5-4 victory for Justice Scalia's 2006 Rapanos v. United States plurality.
Democrats spent tens of millions of dollars last year's midterms meddling in Republican primaries. Republicans may now be borrowing a page from their playbook.
Oil Companies Fail to Convince the Eighth Circuit Climate Cases Should Be Removed to Federal Court (Updated)
The Eighth Circuit joins the First, Third, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth in rejecting the arguments for removal, but Judge David Stras writes an interesting concurrence.
A Ninth Circuit opinion concludes that when a federal agency seeks a voluntary remand of a contested rule, that is not enough to vacate the regulation.
If SCOTUS finds in favor of a small-town Idaho couple in Sackett v. EPA, it could end the federal government's jurisdiction over millions of acres of land.
Golden State lawmakers have refused to fix the California Environmental Quality Act. Now it could cost them a brand new office building.
Hundred Acre's lawsuit alleges heavy-handed and extralegal enforcement by county environmental regulators.
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has declared that the little fish that almost stopped completion of the Tellico Dam has recovered.
The justices wrestled with the problem of identifying a clear, coherent, and administrable definition to constrain federal regulatory jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.
Ten years after their unanimous Supreme Court victory against the Environmental Protection Agency, the Sacketts return to One First Street for another round.
Five Circuits have considered, and rejected, fossil fuel efforts to get state-law tort and nuisance claims removed to federal court. Will their luck change in the Supreme Court?
My forthcoming article the good, the bad, and the likely implications of the Supreme Court's decision West Virginia v. EPA
Chief Justice Roberts writes for a six-justice majority in West Virginia v. EPA.
No matter how the Supreme Court rules in West Virginia v. EPA, absent legislative action it is unlikely new power plant rules will be in force before 2024.
Three environmentalists groups had argued that the city failed to perform a state-required environmental analysis of its Minneapolis 2040 comprehensive plan.
The ruling is not as ridiculous as it sounds. But it's still a fishy decision!
A state court rules that bumble bees may qualify as "fish" under the California Endangered Species Act
A California Supreme Court decision freezing enrollment at the state's flagship university is focusing the public's fury on the normally obscure, but incredibly consequential, California Environmental Quality Act.
Good intentions, bad results
Liberal Berkeley officials might be coming around to the view held by conservative business leaders, who have long argued that California's Environmental Quality Act needs an overhaul.
Supreme Court Digs into Statutory Details More than Standing or Nondelegation in West Virginia v. EPA
At today's oral argument, the justices explored Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, the major questions doctrine, justiciability and the regulation of advertising for four-foot cigars smoked through hookahs.
Why the Supreme Court's Decision in NFIB v. OSHA May Be Even Worse News for Climate Regulation than You Thought
Insofar as the Court was concerned about pretext, it may be more difficult for the EPA to reduce greenhouse gases using regulatory authority to control emissions.
Supreme Court Grants Certiorari to Clarify the Scope of Federal Regulatory Jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act
The Sacketts get a return trip to the Supreme Court.
Perhaps surprisingly, the Biden Administration is not pushing an expansive interpretation of federal regulatory jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.
A surprising grant of certiorari places a high-stakes regulatory case on the Court's docket, with profound implications for EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gases.
Nuisance claims may not be a particularly effective way to address the problem of climate change, but federal law does not preempt state common law nuisance claims seeking compensatory damages.