Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency

Brief of Amicus Curiae The Cato Institute

more+
less-

In 2003, the Environmental Protection Agency rejected a petition filed by a number of states, cities, and environmental groups, which asked the EPA to regulate vehicular emissions of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. In Massachusetts v. EPA, the Supreme Court must decide whether the EPA properly denied this petition. Cato’s amicus brief, authored by law professor Jonathan Adler and joined by professors James L. Huffman and Andrew P. Morriss, makes two arguments on the EPA’s behalf: First, it argues that the states’ and environmental groups’ claims must be dismissed for lack of standing. Second, the brief demonstrates that, even if the Court were to adopt the plaintiffs’ creative standing theories, the Clean Air Act simply doesn’t give the EPA any authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Written by:

more+
less-

Cato Institute on:

JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×
Loading...
×
×