{"id":2281,"date":"2013-09-19T15:59:46","date_gmt":"2013-09-19T20:59:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/?p=2281"},"modified":"2013-10-17T12:02:29","modified_gmt":"2013-10-17T17:02:29","slug":"ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/","title":{"rendered":"Ninth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to California\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

by Shelley Welton, Deputy Director & Fellow<\/p>\n

In what can only be interpreted as a major victory for California, the Ninth Circuit ruled<\/a> on Wednesday, September 19 in Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Corey<\/i> that the state\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) was neither discriminatory nor extraterritorial under the dormant Commerce Clause, reversing the district court opinion.\u00a0 As someone eager to see states bravely forge ahead in climate policy, I am excited about this landmark opinion for several reasons.<\/p>\n

A little background<\/i>:<\/b> As one component of its state plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, California required its Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop regulations that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions from fuels by ten percent by 2020.\u00a0 As part of this effort, CARB adopted the LCFS.\u00a0 The standard requires fuel suppliers in the state to meet certain average annual carbon limitations, with the \u201ccarbon intensity\u201d of a particular fuel measured via \u201clifecycle analysis,\u201d thereby including carbon produced during production, refining, and transportation of a fuel.\u00a0 Fuel suppliers can meet the standard by changing the carbon intensity of their fuels, or by purchasing credits from other suppliers with carbon intensity averages below state requirements.<\/p>\n

Yesterday\u2019s Ruling<\/i><\/b>: <\/i>In 2011, a California district court found that the LCFS facially discriminated against out-of-state fuel producers and operated as an impermissible extraterritorial regulation under the dormant Commerce Clause.\u00a0 In its 2-1 opinion, the Ninth Circuit reverses both of these holdings in what I find to be a very pragmatic, sensible reading of the dormant commerce clause doctrine.<\/p>\n

On the issue of discrimination, the majority explains that although the LCFS facially treats fuels from different places differently, this fact is not in and of itself fatal under the dormant Commerce Clause so long as there is a non-protectionist reason for doing so.\u00a0 It finds that there clearly is such a reason, because fuels from different regions have different carbon intensities that need to be reflected in the regulations in order to create an effective scheme.\u00a0 In so holding, the Ninth Circuit offers resounding support for the use of lifecycle analysis in regulating products for their carbon content.\u00a0 It finds lifecycle analysis to be an \u201cimportant,\u201d \u201creliable,\u201d \u201ceffective\u201d method \u201cbased on scientific data\u201d for fairly evaluating the relative carbon emissions of a certain end product.<\/p>\n

The Ninth Circuit also, appropriately, treats extraterritoriality narrowly.\u00a0 On this point, it explains that the relevant Supreme Court precedent really only extends the doctrine to those limited situations where a state actually imposes its regulations on another state.\u00a0 And here, California is in no way imposing conditions on other jurisdictions\u2014it is simply determining to \u201ctake responsibility\u201d for the carbon emissions resulting from fuels sold in the state.<\/p>\n

Perhaps my favorite part of the opinion is the way that the court artfully\u2014and frequently\u2014juxtaposes the dormant Commerce Clause inquiry with the familiar conceit that states are laboratories of democracy that should be encouraged to experiment with novel ways to solve pressing problems.\u00a0 This narrative first appears early in the opinion when the court celebrates California\u2019s long history as a leader in environmental protection.\u00a0 Later, it recurs in the court\u2019s discussion of Balkanization, where it readily dismisses concerns that California\u2019s standard will create incompatible obligations around the country and instead points to past instances where state leadership has spurred federal action.\u00a0 The court even goes on to chide plaintiffs for trying to defeat state attempts to control climate change by \u201crelying on archaic formalism to prevent action against a new type of harm.\u201d<\/p>\n

What happens next:<\/i><\/b> The opinion concludes by remanding to the district court to consider whether the regulations discriminate in purpose or effect and, if not, for application of Pike <\/i>balancing.\u00a0 But as Ann Carlson rightly noted over at Legal Planet<\/a>, the Ninth Circuit\u2019s analysis already contains significant discussion of the LCFS\u2019s effects, such that future invalidation on those grounds would seem unlikely.\u00a0 The bigger question looming is whether the Supreme Court will take up the case.\u00a0 It might create an interesting split, given that several of the conservative justices have in the past expressed skepticism about the dormant Commerce Clause.<\/p>\n

While we wait for the court battle to finish playing out, this opinion should hopefully embolden additional state efforts to regulate climate change, and should give some comfort to CARB that its cap-and-trade program can withstand constitutional scrutiny as well.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Shelley Welton, Deputy Director & Fellow In what can only be interpreted as a major victory for California, the Ninth Circuit ruled on Wednesday, September 19 in Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Corey that the state\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) was neither discriminatory nor extraterritorial under the dormant Commerce Clause, reversing the district […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":768,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5701,5680,5673],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-2281","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-cap-trade","7":"category-clean-energy","8":"category-litigation","9":"czr-hentry"},"yoast_head":"\nNinth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to California\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard - Climate Law Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ninth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to California\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard - Climate Law Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"by Shelley Welton, Deputy Director & Fellow In what can only be interpreted as a major victory for California, the Ninth Circuit ruled on Wednesday, September 19 in Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Corey that the state\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) was neither discriminatory nor extraterritorial under the dormant Commerce Clause, reversing the district […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Climate Law Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2013-09-19T20:59:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2013-10-17T17:02:29+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Shelley Welton\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@sabincenter\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@sabincenter\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Shelley Welton\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2013\\\/09\\\/19\\\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2013\\\/09\\\/19\\\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Shelley Welton\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/d96b7333fc81bff00148b58154d8d9be\"},\"headline\":\"Ninth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to California\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard\",\"datePublished\":\"2013-09-19T20:59:46+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2013-10-17T17:02:29+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2013\\\/09\\\/19\\\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":737,\"commentCount\":1,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Cap & Trade\",\"Clean Energy\",\"Climate Litigation\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2013\\\/09\\\/19\\\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2013\\\/09\\\/19\\\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\\\/\",\"name\":\"Ninth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to California\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard - Climate Law Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2013-09-19T20:59:46+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2013-10-17T17:02:29+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2013\\\/09\\\/19\\\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2013\\\/09\\\/19\\\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2013\\\/09\\\/19\\\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ninth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to California\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/\",\"name\":\"Climate Law Blog\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/files\\\/2023\\\/02\\\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/files\\\/2023\\\/02\\\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png\",\"width\":2752,\"height\":260,\"caption\":\"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/sabincenter\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/d96b7333fc81bff00148b58154d8d9be\",\"name\":\"Shelley Welton\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/author\\\/swelto\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ninth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to California\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard - Climate Law Blog","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ninth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to California\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard - Climate Law Blog","og_description":"by Shelley Welton, Deputy Director & Fellow In what can only be interpreted as a major victory for California, the Ninth Circuit ruled on Wednesday, September 19 in Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Corey that the state\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) was neither discriminatory nor extraterritorial under the dormant Commerce Clause, reversing the district […]","og_url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/","og_site_name":"Climate Law Blog","article_published_time":"2013-09-19T20:59:46+00:00","article_modified_time":"2013-10-17T17:02:29+00:00","author":"Shelley Welton","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@sabincenter","twitter_site":"@sabincenter","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Shelley Welton","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/"},"author":{"name":"Shelley Welton","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/person\/d96b7333fc81bff00148b58154d8d9be"},"headline":"Ninth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to California\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard","datePublished":"2013-09-19T20:59:46+00:00","dateModified":"2013-10-17T17:02:29+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/"},"wordCount":737,"commentCount":1,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Cap & Trade","Clean Energy","Climate Litigation"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/","name":"Ninth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to California\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard - Climate Law Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#website"},"datePublished":"2013-09-19T20:59:46+00:00","dateModified":"2013-10-17T17:02:29+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2013\/09\/19\/ninth-circuit-rejects-constitutional-challenge-to-californias-low-carbon-fuel-standard\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ninth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to California\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/","name":"Climate Law Blog","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization","name":"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2023\/02\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2023\/02\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png","width":2752,"height":260,"caption":"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/x.com\/sabincenter"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/person\/d96b7333fc81bff00148b58154d8d9be","name":"Shelley Welton","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/author\/swelto\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2281","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/768"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2281"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2281\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2281"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2281"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2281"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}