MENU

Environmental Law

Murray Energy: The Limits of EPA Authority - Podcast

Environmental Law & Property Rights Practice Group Podcast
Robert R. Gasaway April 24, 2015

In what has become a highly visible challenge to the EPA’s authority under the Clean Air Act, the D.C. Court of Appeals heard oral argument on April 16, 2015. The case is being viewed by some as a fundamental test of executive authority and the judiciary’s willingness to evaluate and rein in possible overreach. Is the rule, now in proposed form, ripe for challenge, at least in part because compliance with the rule requires a great deal of planning and expense even before its adoption? Has the EPA overreached and, if so, will the court intervene? Or has the EPA properly utilized its statutory rulemaking authority for what all parties indicate will be an important change in the way coal-fired power plants are able to operate?

  • Robert R. Gasaway, Partner, Kirkland & Ellis LLP

The Environmental Protection Agency’s Waters of the United States Rule - Podcast

Environmental Law & Property Rights Practice Group Podcast
Brent A. Fewell, Patrick A. Parenteau April 22, 2015

The Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers are currently engaged in a controversial rulemaking to redefine its jurisdiction over bodies of water through a new definition of the “Waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act. Some have criticized the proposed rule, claiming that it is an overreach that would give the federal government authority over huge areas of private and state land that are rarely even wet, while others have dismissed these concerns as overblown and have pointed out the benefits of clarifying what is currently a murky area of law. Our experts discussed the rulemaking and presented both sides of the argument.

  • Brent A. Fewell, Partner, Troutman Sanders LLP
  • Prof. Patrick A. Parenteau, Senior Counsel, Professor of Law, Vermont Law School

Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency - Post-Argument SCOTUScast

SCOTUScast 3-31-15 featuring Jonathan Adler
Jonathan H. Adler March 31, 2015

On March 24, 2015, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency. The question in this case is whether the Environmental Protection Agency was acting unreasonably when it did not consider the costs of compliance in determining whether it is appropriate to regulate hazardous air pollutants emitted by electric utilities

To discuss the case, we have Jonathan Adler, who is the Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law; Director, Center for Business Law and Regulation at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law.

Environmental Protection Agency Back in the Supreme Court: Michigan v. EPA - Podcast

Environmental Law & Property Rights Practice Group Podcast
Jonathan H. Adler March 27, 2015

On March 25, 2015, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency. The case is comprised of three consolidated petitions, one from a group of 21 states, one from the trade group for electrical power plants, and one from the trade group for suppliers of coal to these plants. The Court will answer “Whether the Environmental Protection Agency unreasonably refused to consider costs in determining whether it is appropriate to regulate hazardous air pollutants emitted by electric utilities.”

  • Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law

“Sue-and-Settle” and the Endangered Species Act - Podcast

Environmental Law & Property Rights and Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Groups Podcast
Susan Combs, Justin Pidot, William Yeatman February 18, 2015

Endangered Species Act listing settlements between the Environmental Protection Agency and private parties have not always allowed state participation or input. Truncated legal proceedings may not sufficiently recognize private partnerships with states to remedy habitat conservation concerns. State actors, energy industries, ranchers, and private property owners have asked how the process may better serve all interests. As some states face settlement decrees that represent potentially dozens – to over a hundred – new listings, is there a way to ensure equity and full process for all concerned parties?

  • Hon. Susan Combs, Former Comptroller of Public Accounts, State of Texas
  • Prof. Justin Pidot, University of Denver Sturm College of Law
  • William Yeatman, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute