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
On December 30, 2022, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (collectively Agencies) announced the issuance of a final rule defining “waters of the United States” (WOTUS), a key...more
On December 30, 2022, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) announced a joint final rule for the revised definition of the “waters of the United States” (WOTUS). The new rule...more
On December 30, 2022 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and the U.S. Department of the Army (“Corps”) (collectively referred to as the “Agencies”) under the Biden Administration released a pre-publication...more
The U.S. Supreme Court's October 2022 term began with a bang: a new Justice on the bench, the public back in the courtroom for the first time since the pandemic - and two hours of argument about the scope of federal...more
On January 24, 2022, the United States Supreme Court granted an appeal to reconsider the extent of federal Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction involving wetlands on a couple’s property in Idaho. The appellants (the Sacketts)...more
“Sackett” may be poised to become a part of the Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdictional lexicon, joining the likes of Rapanos, significant nexus, relatively permanent, and Solid Waste Agency of Cook County, on the tip of every...more
The ongoing saga of how to define "waters of the United States" (WOTUS) continues. In this latest installment, we have, in effect, time-traveled back to 2008. The United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA")...more
In 2005 the Corps of Engineers adopted a Regulatory Guidance Letter (RGL) providing that an “approved jurisdictional determination” (AJD) “will remain valid for a period of five years, unless new information warrants revision...more
The EPA and the Corps of Engineers are seeing an unprecedented amount of requests for determining whether or not an activity impacts a Water of the United States and triggers Clean Water Act restrictions and permitting. As...more
On January 24, 2020, the Trump Administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) issued their long awaited “Waters of the United States” rule defining the jurisdictional reach...more
On December 28, 2018, the EPA published in the Federal Register a revised definition of “waters of the United States” (the “Proposed Rule”), as used in the Clean Water Act, to replace the current definition that was finalized...more
Benjamin Stonelake In a unanimous decision and opinion delivered by Justice Sotomayor on January 22, 2018, in National Association of Manufacturers v. U.S. Department of Defense, the United States Supreme Court (“SCOTUS”)...more
• U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously – on narrow procedural grounds – that the courts of appeals do not have original jurisdiction to hear challenges to the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Obama Administration's 2015 rule...more
The United States Environmental Protection Agency and United States Corps of Engineers (collectively “EPA”) finalized a rule that would add an applicability date to the Obama Administration era revised definition of the Clean...more
On January 22, 2018, the United States Supreme Court ruled unanimously in National Association of Manufacturers v. Department of Defense that legal challenges to an Obama Administration regulation defining “waters of the...more
In an important procedural decision, a unanimous United States Supreme Court ruled that challenges to the 2015 Obama-era rule re-defining Waters of the United States (WOTUS) under the Clean Water Act were properly before...more
The United States Supreme Court has handed regulated parties their second win in four years concerning when they can take EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to court over wetlands permitting issues. In 2012, the...more
CONGRESS FINDS THE FORMULA TO REFORM CHEMICAL REGULATION - The Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) is the primary federal law by which the manufacture, import and use of chemical substances are regulated in the United...more
On May 31, 2016, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., Inc. holding that approved judicial determinations as to the presence of wetlands issued by the...more
The United States Supreme Court handed landowners and developers a win this month in a unanimous decision allowing appeals to federal courts of Army Corps of Engineers determinations that a body of water or wetland is subject...more
On May 31, 2016, in United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., the US Supreme Court unanimously held that a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) approved jurisdictional determination (JD) is a final agency action...more
Environmental and Policy Focus - U.S. Supreme Court allows pre-permit challenges to approved jurisdictional determinations - Allen Matkins - May 31 - In a major new legal development for the Clean Water Act's...more
In a rebuke to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”), the United States Supreme Court unanimously held on May 31, 2016, in Corps v. Hawkes that jurisdictional determinations (“JDs”) under the Clean Water Act are...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Supreme Court decided that Army Corps’ jurisdictional determinations are judicially reviewable. This decision leaves open the question of whether other types of administrative decisions are immediately...more
A few months ago, we (and most everyone else not working at the Justice Department) predicted that the Supreme Court would rule that property owners seeking to develop potential federal wetlands on their property may...more