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 Endangered Species Act: Hotel California for Wildlife
This special episode of A Voice for Rural America explores how the ESA could be reformed to achieve better recovery outcomes for listed species.
-
Quibbling While the West Burns
In a world where bureaucracy moves slow and wildfires move fast, it’s little surprise that fire keeps winning.
-
Western Rangelands Are Overpopulated With Wild Horses. The East Can Help.
Easterners can offer a lifeline to wild horses, helping to rehabilitate Western ecosystems and ensure the well-being of these majestic animals.