No Password Required: USF Cybercrime Professor, Former Federal Agent, and Vintage Computer Archivist
Georgia on My Mind: On the Frontlines of Federal Rulemaking With AG Carr — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Small Refinery Exemption Litigation Update
[Podcast] Keith Matthews and Chris Wozniak: Talking Ag Biotech Episode 5
[Podcast] Keith Matthews and Chris Wozniak: Talking Ag Biotech Episode 4
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Look at the Current Challenge to Judicial Deference to Federal Agencies and What it Means for the Consumer Financial Services Industry, With Special Guest, Craig Green, Professor, Temple University
What to Expect in Chemicals Policy and Regulation and on Capitol Hill in 2023
H2-OWOW! – A Reflective Conversation with John Goodin, Former Director of EPA’s Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds – Reflections on Water Podcast
Reflections on Sackett - Reflections on Water Podcast
PFAS in Focus: Wastewater Utility Perspectives From Jay Hoskins, Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District - Reflections on Water Podcast
[Podcast] Keith Matthews and Chris Wozniak: Talking Ag Biotech
Environmental Agencies, Superfund Cleanups, and Managing Enforcement Actions
West Virginia vs. EPA Part II: U.S. Supreme Court Applies the Major Questions Doctrine to limit EPA Regulatory Authority
#WorkforceWednesday: Employers Respond to Dobbs, Implications of the Supreme Court's EPA Ruling, and Pay Increases for CA Health Care Workers - Employment Law This Week®
PFAS Regulatory Update: EPA Issues Updated Drinking Water Health Advisories
West Virginia vs. EPA: An Environmental Regulations Case with Broad Implications for Agency Power
Diving In: An Interview With Radhika Fox, Assistant Administrator, Office of Water - Reflections on Water Podcast
McGirt Uncertainty Extends to Federal Environmental Regulations in Indian Country
EPA Plan Changes PFAS Outlook For Companies, Regulators
2BInformed: Understanding the EPA’s New PFAS Strategic Roadmap and Upcoming PBT Regulations
Late last month, I noted that the overturning of Chevron did not mean the end of judicial deference to agency expertise. Earlier this week, a decision by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals provided some confirmation that...more
The Clean Air Act (CAA) directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set standards for common air pollutants. When the EPA sets these standards, States must submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) showing how the...more
The Clean Air Act (“CAA”) envisions states and the federal government working together to improve air quality. Under the CAA, states must develop State Implementation Plans (“SIPs”) to implement National Ambient Air Quality...more
The US Supreme Court issued on June 27, 2024 an opinion in Ohio v. EPA staying enforcement of the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). The FIP sought to impose more stringent...more
The U.S. Supreme Court today upended a 40-year-old decision that made it easier for the federal government to regulate the environment, public health, workplace safety, and consumer protections, delivering a far-reaching and...more
The Supreme Court has released its opinion in Ohio v. EPA, a case involving whether the federal government’s “good neighbor” ozone regulations were properly promulgated. This decision impacts the authority of the U.S....more
The Supreme Court’s day started with the specter of yet another leak of a reproductive rights decision having occurred....more
Good morning! This is Akin’s newsletter on climate change policy and regulatory developments, providing information on major climate policy headlines from the past two weeks and forthcoming climate-related events and...more
The Environmental Protection Agency, under the Clean Air Act, requires states to work with the EPA to address the interstate transport of air pollution. Under the “Good Neighbor Plan,” the EPA requires each state to implement...more
Chevron deference has been a staple of American federal jurisprudence since its implementation in 1984. The case, Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. National Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, arose from EPA’s adoption of a...more
This is a brief roundup of recent federal court environmental and regulatory law decisions from the federal courts over the past few months, including the much anticipated ruling in Sackett, et ux., v, Environmental...more
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) published on February 15th a final rule reaffirming its decision that it remains appropriate and necessary to regulate hazardous air pollutants (“HAP”) from power...more
On the last day of its 2022 term, the Supreme Court curtailed the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to cut carbon emissions from the nation’s power plants. The court held that the “generation shifting”...more
Introduction - In West Virginia v. EPA, the Supreme Court confirmed a robust “major questions” canon of construction that will restrain administrative agencies’ ability to regulate on issues of “vast economic and...more
On June 30, 2022, in a 6-3 decision, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. writing for the majority, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in West Virginia v. EPA limiting the EPA’s ability to regulate carbon...more
On June 30, 2022 the Supreme Court decided West Virginia v. EPA. This case not only has environmental law implications, but also speaks directly to executive agency overreach in potentially many other contexts. On its face,...more
What Happened: West Virginia v. EPA - In West Virginia v. EPA, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jones Day client, the North American Coal Corporation, and determined that the EPA did not have clear authorization from...more
On June 30, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court held in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, 597 U.S. ___ (2022), that the Clean Air Act did not clearly authorize the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to create the...more
Key Points- For the first time, the Supreme Court has invoked explicitly the “major questions doctrine”—which requires Congress to speak clearly when authorizing agency action in certain extraordinary cases—to strike...more
On June 30th, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in West Virginia v. EPA. The Court concluded that the EPA had exceeded its authority under the Clean Air Act by establishing emission caps in the Clean Power...more
On June 30, 2022, the United States Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in West Virginia et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency et al., which invalidated the Clean Power Plan (“CPP”), an Obama-era regulation...more
On June 30, 2022, the United States Supreme Court struck down the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Clean Power Plan ("CPP"), limiting the agency's authority to address climate change, in the case West Virginia v....more
On June 30, 2022, the United States Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in West Virginia v. EPA, a case challenging the scope of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA’s”) authority to regulate...more
On June 30, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided West Virginia et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency, holding that the EPA lacks authority under Section 7411(d) of the Clean Air Act to limit greenhouse gas emissions from...more
On June 30, the last day of an historic term, the Supreme Court issued its decision in West Virginia v. EPA. As expected, the Court struck down EPA's 2015 Clean Power Plan (CPP), which was intended to reduce greenhouse gas...more