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
-
New Fund Offers Relief for Wyoming Ranchers Facing Wildlife Disease Risk
Ranchers and Conservationists behind East Yellowstone Brucellosis Compensation Fund aim to address challenges of elk migrations on private lands
-
Conservation Groups Launch Suit Against Fish and Wildlife Service for Impairing Species Recovery and Ignoring Science
Two conservation groups are launching a suit against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) over the "blanket rule" that disregards science and hinders habitat restoration efforts under the Endangered Species Act.
-
Setting the Record Straight on PERC’s Support for Public Lands
Finding common ground to advance conservation