The Yale Law Journal’s new “Summary Judgment” online series features a set of essays on the Supreme Court’s decision in American Electric Power v. Connecticut, in which the Court held unanimously that suits against utilities alleging their emissions of greenhouse gases contribute to the “public nuisance” of global warming under federal common law were displaced by the Clean Air Act. Contributors to the online symposium include Hari Osofsky, Daniel Farber, James May, Maxine Burkett, Michael Gerrard, and yours truly. My contribution, “A Tale of Two Cases” (PDF), discusses how the outcome in AEP was predetermined by the Court’s prior holding in Massachusetts v. EPA that greenhouse gases were pollutants subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act. The essay is based on a longer article forthcoming in the Cato Supreme Court Review that I will discuss at the Cato Constitution Day event on Thursday.
Originally posted at The Volokh Conspiracy.A Tale of Two Cases
Date
Topics
Related Content
-
The Next Era of American Conservation
As we celebrate the 250th anniversary of the United States, it’s time to add a new chapter to America’s conservation legacy, with private lands, market-based tools, and bottom-up approaches at the center.
-
Success Shouldn’t Trigger Stricter Rules
An amicus brief arguing the Ninth Circuit should reaffirm that the ESA’s experimental population program is meant to reward collaboration, not penalize it.
-
Ranches Face a Generational Crisis. Virtual Fencing Can Help.
This emerging technology simplifies ranch management, reduces physical labor, and provides a level of flexibility that those stubborn traditional fences could never match.