Between January 2020 and March 2023, U.S. electronic cigarette sales grew 43%, from 15.6 million devices per month to 22.4 million devices. During this time frame, the portion of sales comprising disposable devices grew from 4 million to 11.9 million per month. The impact upon the environment has been largely overlooked by policymakers.
On February 7, 2024, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a final rule imposing a stricter limit for the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The annual exposure standard for PM2.5, currently set at 12 micrograms per cubic meter of air, will now be 9 micrograms per cubic meter, marking the first time in over eight years that EPA has strengthened any NAAQS. The rule is predicted to have many health benefits, such as preventing 4,500 premature deaths by 2032, which may particularly affect overburdened communities.
The U.S. Supreme Court's October Term 2022 had major implications for environmental law, including its most significant Clean Water Act decision ever. Upcoming cases in October Term 2023 have the potential to be just as impactful. On September 25, 2023, the Environmental Law Institute hosted a panel of experts who provided an overview of key rulings and major take-aways from the Court’s prior term, and discussed cases that have been granted review or are likely to be considered by the justices in the upcoming term.
The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 added seven new sections to the Clean Air Act (CAA) and provided the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with substantial new authorities and resources. This Article examines these new amendments and the EPA-related provisions of the IRA, and explains the major implications of this historic legislation.
On October 29, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, a petition filed by several states and coal companies attacking the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA’s) regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The Court’s holding in this case would determine EPA’s continued ability to use the CAA—including the national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) program—as a climate change tool.
On the final day of the 2021-2022 term, the U.S. Supreme Court released its decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency. The majority (6-3) opinion limited the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants under Clean Air Act §111(d), in part by invoking the “major questions doctrine.” The decision has implications for EPA’s authority both to regulate emissions from stationary sources and to regulate greenhouse gases more broadly.
This Article explores the relationship between state environmental citizen suit provisions and judicial standing requirements, and analyzes whether the introduction of citizen suits into state statutory law inspired increasingly strict state standing requirements, as occurred at the federal level. Specifically, it identifies how state judiciaries have interpreted standing and aggrievement in response to general, non-media-specific citizen suit provisions, both in the common law and in administrative law.
In 2009, when carbon dioxide (CO2) levels were at 387.43 parts per million, the Center for Biological Diversity and 350.org submitted a citizen petition calling on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to take steps necessary to institute a national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under §§108-110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA). For 12 years, the petition was simply ignored. Then, the day President Donald Trump left office, outgoing EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler issued a letter denying the petition.
Over the past 50 years, tremendous progress has been made in reducing air pollution under the Clean Air Act. Nevertheless, while air quality has improved greatly for much of the nation, there are still places where the goal of attaining national standards has still not been reached. This is often true in urban locations that are affected by multiple pollution sources; typically, these areas are also environmental justice communities. Recent events have called attention to the urgent need for concrete action to address the many problems of these communities.
The Trump Administration has aggressively rolled back prior administrations’ environmental regulations and natural resource policies, and critics of this agenda have turned to the judiciary. A remarkable string of federal court decisions has faulted the Administration for failing to follow the standard for agency policy change articulated in Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, Inc.