2015 Separation of Powers CLE Course Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Group Thursday, August 20, 12:00 AMThe Ritz-Carlton, Bachelor Gulch
0130 Daybreak Ridge
Avon, CO 81620
U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia and Professor John Baker of Georgetown Law will teach a ten-hour CLE course on the courts, standing, the non-delegation doctrine, and appointments and removal, as they relate to the separation of powers. This course is offered exclusively to Federalist Society members. [Register now!] SCOTUScast 4-29-15 featuring Daniel Lyons
Daniel Lyons April 29, 2015
On April 21, 2015, the Supreme Court decided Oneok, Inc. v. Learjet. The question in this case is whether the Natural Gas Act preempts state-law antitrust claims which challenge industry practices that directly affect the wholesale natural gas market when those claims are asserted by litigants who purchased gas in retail transactions.
In an opinion delivered by Justice Breyer, the Court held by a vote of 7-2 that although the Natural Gas Act occupies the field of matters relating to wholesale sales and transportation of natural gas in interstate commerce, the state law antitrust claims in this case may nevertheless proceed and are not preempted. Justice Breyer’s opinion for the Court was joined in full by Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg, Alito, Sotomayor, and Kagan, and by Justice Thomas except as to Part I-A. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. Justice Scalia filed a dissenting opinion, which Chief Justice Roberts joined. The judgment of the Ninth Circuit was affirmed.
To discuss the case, we have Daniel Lyons, who is an Associate Professor of Law at the Boston College Law School. Environmental Law & Property Rights Practice Group Podcast
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