Michael B. Gerrard Faculty Director The Supreme Court’s unprecedented, unexpected and unexplained action yesterday staying implementation of the Clean Power Plan is one of the most environmentally harmful judicial actions of all time. However, the damage it does to the United States’ ability to meet its Paris pledge is less than it might seem. But […]
Posted in: Clean Air Act, Litigation, Paris Agreement, Supreme Court | Comments (2)
Meredith Wilensky, Associate Director & Fellow Columbia Center for Climate Change Law On October 15, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in response to six petitions requesting review of EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases. This post will address some basic questions to clarify the scope of the question accepted for review and the implications and potential […]
Posted in: Clean Air Act, EPA, Supreme Court, Uncategorized | Comment (0)
By: Danielle Sugarman, Fellow On Tuesday, June 26, 2012, in a major victory for the environment and President Obama’s Administration, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dismissed a series of challenges to EPA’s body of greenhouse gas regulation. The cases, called Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. EPA, were brought by […]
Posted in: Clean Air Act, Supreme Court | Comments (3)
by Michael B. Gerrard Director, Center for Climate Change Law Here is my instant analysis of the decision (PDF) just issued by the Supreme Court in American Electric Power v. Connecticut, the case in which several states and others sought a court order requiring several large electric utilities to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions because […]
Posted in: Supreme Court | Comment (0)
by Daniel Firger Associate Director On April 11, 2011, petitioners in American Electric Power v. Connecticut, five private investor-owned utility companies, filed their reply brief. On the same day, the Solicitor General filed a separate reply brief on behalf of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), an electric utility owned by the federal government, as respondent supporting petitioners. These reply briefs […]
Posted in: Clean Air Act, Supreme Court | Comment (1)
By Julia Ciardullo Fellow On March 11, 2011, the plaintiff-appellees in American Electric Power Co. Inc., et al., v. Connecticut, et al. (No. 10-174) – six states,[1] the City of New York, and three land trusts[2] – filed their opposing briefs with the United States Supreme Court (the “Court”). In a prior post, we compared […]
Posted in: Supreme Court | Comments (2)
By Julia Ciardullo Fellow On January 31, 2011, five investor-owned utilities[1] (Petitioners) and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), an electric utility owned by the US government, filed separate briefs with the United States Supreme Court (USSC) in American Electric Power Co. Inc., et al., v. Connecticut, et al. (No. 10-174). The case concerns the right […]
Posted in: Energy, Supreme Court | Comment (1)
Daniel Firger Associate Director The Supreme Court on January 10 issued an order denying plaintiffs’ petition for mandamus in Comer v. Murphy Oil, a closely-watched case arising out of damage to Gulf Coast properties as a result of Hurricane Katrina. The order, issued with no comment by the Court, marks the end of a highly […]
Posted in: Nuisance Actions, Supreme Court | Comment (0)