Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct. 1438 (2007) Chevron Analysis.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Paul M. Seby McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP 1875 Lawrence Street, Suite 200 Denver, CO (303) WESTERN REGIONAL AIR PARTNERSHIP.
Advertisements

Public Nuisance Claims for Climate Change Impacts: Preemption, Political Question, and Foreign Policy Concerns Prof. Randall S. Abate Florida Coastal School.
The Environmental Debate The Environment and Politics 1. Since the 1970s, there has been a debate over the state of the environment and the role of government.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Background and Standing.
What options do states have? What is Georgia planning to do? What are some of the other states doing? What are the possible implications to permit fees?
A Safe Landing for the Climate (Chapter 2). Greenhouse gases are gases in an atmosphere that absorb and emit radiation within the thermal infrared range.
Environmental Policy. Until recently, environmentalists have directed their efforts toward persuading the public that there is in fact an environmental.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Round 1 Global Warming Litigation.
Environmental Policy. Frequently, environmentalists have directed their efforts toward persuading the public that there is in fact an environmental crisis.
Environmental Policy. Until recently, environmentalists have directed their efforts toward persuading the public that there is in fact an environmental.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Chevron Analysis.
Powers and Functions of Administrative Agencies. Question - Net-Neutrality FTC Announced Final Regulations – Late February 2015 Imagine you are a member.
Global Air Quality: Policies for Ozone Depletion and Global Warming Chapter 13 © 2004 Thomson Learning/South-Western.
Public Opinion on Climate Change WorldPublicOpinion.org is a project managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland.
Rulemaking Part III. 2 Procedural Rules Procedural rules are exempt from notice and comment The form of an application for benefits is procedural The.
Should the U.S. ratify it? Daniela Sol 21 Oct PROTOCOL.
Taking Action Before or After a Rulemaking or Bill is Proposed Warren Hoemann Senior Vice President – Industry Affairs American Trucking Associations.
Chapter 25 Environmental Protection and Global Warming.
Taking privacy cases through the Human Rights Review Tribunal Some observations on process and the roles of the Privacy Commissioner and the Director of.
Changing Policy without Changing Law: Addressing Climate Change under the Clean Air Act Philip Wallach Fellow, Governance Studies Brookings Institution.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Round 1 Global Warming Litigation.
Climate Change Climate Change vs. Global Warming Global Warming Long-term rise in Earth’s temperature (a few degrees) Increase in greenhouse effect.
Distinguishing: Clean Air Act, EPA Rules, Regulations and Guidance David Cole U.S. EPA, OAQPS Research Triangle Park, NC.
Environmental Management System Definitions
1. Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) – Naturally occurring and man- made. 5,505.2 mmts emitted in 2009, GWP = 1 Methane (CH 4 ) - Naturally occurring and man-made.
Advisory Committee Kickoff Meeting SWRCB Program to Develop Sediment Quality Objectives for Enclosed Bays and Estuaries of California July 29, 2003 CAL/EPA.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Round 1 Global Warming Litigation.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Background and Standing.
1 EPA’s Climate Change Strategy Robert J. Meyers Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation December 3, 2007.
Judicial Review "The rules governing judicial review have no more substance at the core than a seedless grape."
Climate Change and the Law: An Historical, Statutory, and Regulatory Perspective David M. Uhlmann Jeffrey F. Liss Professor from Practice Director, Environmental.
Access to Judicial Review Part II. 2 Procedural Injury In Lujan, the procedural violation was the failure of the agency to do an inter-agency consultation.
Update on EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Rulemakings Norman W. Fichthorn Hunton & Williams LLP 2010 American Public Power Association Energy and Air Quality Task.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Chevron Analysis.
Prentice Hall © PowerPoint Slides to accompany The Legal Environment of Business and Online Commerce 5E, by Henry R. Cheeseman Chapter 25 Environmental.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Background and Standing.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Round 1 Global Warming Litigation.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Background and Standing.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW DEBATE CYCLE #2. STATE OF SETONIA (PETITIONER) V. THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (RESPONDENT)
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Round 1 Global Warming Litigation.
Chapter 7 Part 1. 2 Judicial Review "The rules governing judicial review have no more substance at the core than a seedless grape." This is a very unsettling.
Is Carbon Dioxide a Pollutant? ENVH 111 October 5, 2010
Kyoto protocol By: Delaja,Alondra,and Kalynn. Definition of Kyoto protocol International treaty among industrialization nations that set mandatory limits.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Round 1 Global Warming Litigation.
1 American Hospital Association Does the Board have the legal authority under the NLRA to adopt a rule determining eight presumptively appropriate bargaining.
Intersection of Climate Law, Policy & Science Margaret Claiborne Campbell Troutman Sanders LLP November 16, 2015.
U.S. Climate Policy at the Federal Level Daniel Farber Sho Sato Professor of Law, Berkeley.
Chapter 7 Part 1. 2 Judicial Review "The rules governing judicial review have no more substance at the core than a seedless grape." This is a very unsettling.
Peter McGrath Moore & Van Allen, PLLC Environmental Regulation: Update 2015.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Background and Standing.
Business Law and the Regulation of Business Chapter 46: Environmental Law By Richard A. Mann & Barry S. Roberts.
Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for GHGs Scott Perry Assistant Counsel.
Climate: ANPR, SIPs and Section 821 WESTAR October 2, 2008.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007)
Rules and Regulations GOVT 2305, Module 14.
Administrative law Ch1 scope and Nature of Administrative Law.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007)
EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases: The View from Washington Troutman Sanders LLP/Trinity Consultants July 20, 2010 PRESENTED BY Peter Glaser Troutman.
The Endangerment Findings: What They Are, How They Are Done, and Who Does Them Prepared by Dr. David W. Schnare, Esq.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007)
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007)
The Clean Air Act By Jessi Walker Per 2.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007)
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007)
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007)
United States — Countervailing and Anti-dumping Measures on Certain Products from China Bijou, Promito, Vasily.
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007)
Importance of Law and Policies in the Environmental Management System
by: Christine Dao Per. 2 11/18/10
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007)
Presentation transcript:

Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Chevron Analysis

Background The Court has determined that the plaintiffs have standing. The court now addresses whether the agency was correct in finding that the Clean Air Act does not give it regulatory authority over green house gases from automobiles. 2

What does the clear air act §7521(a)(1) require the EPA to issue regulations on? The [EPA] Administrator shall by regulation prescribe (and from time to time revise) in accordance with the provisions of this section, standards applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare... 3

4 What is the definition of pollutant in the act? [36] The Act defines "air pollutant" to include "any air pollution agent or combination of such agents, including any physical, chemical, biological, radioactive... substance or matter which is emitted into or otherwise enters the ambient air." §7602(g). "Welfare" is also defined broadly: among other things, it includes "effects on... weather... and climate." §7602(h). Can you be a polluter under the law?

5 What was the National Climate Program Act of 1978? In 1978, Congress enacted the National Climate Program Act, 92 Stat. 601, which required the President to establish a program to "...assist the Nation and the world to understand and respond to natural and man-induced climate processes and their implications..."

6 What did the National Academy of Sciences Tell President Carter? "If carbon dioxide continues to increase, the study group finds no reason to doubt that climate changes will result and no reason to believe that these changes will be negligible.... A wait-and-see policy may mean waiting until it is too late."

7 What did the Global Climate Protection Act of 1987 require the EPA to do? Finding that "manmade pollution -- the release of carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and other trace gases into the atmosphere -- may be producing a long- term and substantial increase in the average temperature on Earth," §1102(1), 101 Stat. 1408, Congress directed EPA to propose to Congress a "coordinated national policy on global climate change...Congress emphasized that "ongoing pollution and deforestation may be contributing now to an irreversible process" and that "[n]ecessary actions must be identified and implemented in time to protect the climate." Who was president in 1987? Is this really a liberal plot?

8 The First Global Warming Treaty What is the Kyoto Protocol? Why did the senate say it would reject it? Did it apply equally to all countries? What was Congress worried about? What is the potential economic consequence of the treaty for the US? Was this a partisan vote? Who was President?

9 What did the petition of October 20, 1999 ask the EPA to do? On October 20, 1999, a group of 19 private organizations filed a rulemaking petition asking EPA to regulate "greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles under §202 of the Clean Air Act." As to EPA's statutory authority, the petition observed that the agency itself had already confirmed that it had the power to regulate carbon dioxide. What does the EPA have to do with a request?

10 What had the EPA said about its authority over CO2 in the past? In 1998, Jonathan Z. Cannon, then EPA's General Counsel, prepared a legal opinion concluding that "CO2 emissions are within the scope of EPA's authority to regulate," even as he recognized that EPA had so far declined to exercise that authority. Are they regulated in other areas? Where would CO2 pose an acute threat? Whose EPA was this?

11 Did EPA seek public comment on the petition? [45] Fifteen months after the petition's submission, EPA requested public comment on "all the issues raised in [the] petition," adding a "particular" request for comments on "any scientific, technical, legal, economic or other aspect of these issues that may be relevant to EPA's consideration of this petition." 66 Fed. Reg. 7486, 7487 (2001).

12 What were EPA's two findings when it finally ruled on the petition in 2003? (1) that contrary to the opinions of its former general counsels, the Clean Air Act does not authorize EPA to issue mandatory regulations to address global climate change, see id., at ; and (2) that even if the agency had the authority to set greenhouse gas emission standards, it would be unwise to do so at this time, Whose EPA is this?

13 What was the EPA evidence of Congressional intent? [48] In concluding that it lacked statutory authority over greenhouse gases, EPA observed that Congress "was well aware of the global climate change issue when it last comprehensively amended the [Clean Air Act] in 1990," yet it declined to adopt a proposed amendment establishing binding emissions limitations. Id., at Congress instead chose to authorize further investigation into climate change.

14 Was there specific legislation on global atmospheric issues? EPA further reasoned that Congress' "specially tailored solutions to global atmospheric issues," 68 Fed. Reg in particular, its 1990 enactment of a comprehensive scheme to regulate pollutants that depleted the ozone layer -- counseled against reading the general authorization of §202(a)(1) to confer regulatory authority over greenhouse gases. Is ozone the same issue as CO2?

15 How was this position strengthened by the political history of the Clean Air Act? [50] EPA reasoned that climate change had its own "political history": Congress designed the original Clean Air Act to address local air pollutants rather than a substance that "is fairly consistent in its concentration throughout the world's atmosphere," declined in 1990 to enact proposed amendments to force EPA to set carbon dioxide emission standards for motor vehicles, ibid. and addressed global climate change in other legislation, 68 Fed. Reg

16 Administrative Policy Rationale for the EPA Position What did EPA want from Congress before regulating green house gasses? What is the regulatory conflicts problem with the EPA regulating gasoline mileage? What does the EPA think of the association between global warming and human production of greenhouse gases? Is this really a technical decision?

17 Impact of Unilateral EPA Regs on Global Warming Treaties Why would motor vehicle regulations conflict with the goal of a comprehensive approach to global warming? Why would such regulations weaken the president's ability to persuade developing countries to lower their emissions?

18 Is this a Political Question? What is the heart of the dissent's belief that this is a political question? Is there merit to this argument? Will US auto emissions standards affect global warming in a measurable, as opposed to theoretical way? Does this meet the traditional tests for redressability? This was a 5-4, Stevens driven case - will it survive?

19 What could EPA have done differently? What does the EPA need to do to support its refusal to make a rule so that the courts cannot find the refusal arbitrary and capricious? Given the broad language of the Clear Air Act, what should EPA have done to avoid this case?

20 Application to Private Suits What are the limitations of this case? What did plaintiffs win? Is the ultimate procedural injury case? Does this opinion imply that there is standing for private claims against private parties? American Electric Power Co., Inc. v. Connecticut American Electric Power Co., Inc. v. Connecticut