Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Courts

Developments in Standing for Public Lands and Natural Resources Litigation

This Article offers a framework for analysis of potential developments in the law of standing in cases involving public lands and natural resources. It is based on recent federal case law and academic literature addressing the law of...

Annual Review of Chinese Environmental Law Developments: 2016

The year 2016 witnessed the adoption or revision of several of China’s environmental laws by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, as well as some major judicial initiatives by the Supreme People’s Court. This...

An Exploration of and Reflection on China’s System of Environmental Public Interest Litigation

Commensurate with its significant environmental problems, China’s environmental protection laws and court system have undergone profound changes in the past two years. In this Comment, the authors highlight the development and...

Judge Garland’s Environmental Decisions

Judge Merrick Garland’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court raises a question for environmental lawyers: What perspectives and predilections with regard to environmental litigation would he bring to the Court? This Comment reflects on...

Standing to Challenge Climate Change Decisions

When the government decides to approve, or not to approve, some activity that has climate change impacts, who has standing to bring a legal challenge? Answers are tricky and, ultimately, unsatisfying. What is clear is that the sheer...

Charting an Uncertain Legal Climate: Article III Standing in Lawsuits to Combat Climate Change

In the wake of Massachusetts v. EPA, lower federal courts have been called upon to apply Article III standing rules in lawsuits featuring a variety of plaintiffs seeking to combat climate change in many different ways. In this...

Supreme Court Review and Preview: NFIB v. Sebelius and Sackett v. EPA

Each October, the U.S. Supreme Court begins a new term. And each year, the Environmental Law Institute convenes a national seminar with some of the preeminent experts on the Supreme Court and environmental law to examine the potential...

Where Standing Closes a Door, May Intervention Open a Window? Article III, Rule 24(a), and Climate Change Solutions

The Article III standing doctrine is hindering judicial resolution of climate change harms. Imposing Article III standing requirements onto movants seeking to intervene in ongoing cases further narrows an increasingly narrow field of...

Cleaning Up the Rest of Agins: Bringing Coherence to Temporary Takings Jurisprudence and Jettisoning "Extraordinary Delay"

 


After decades of confusion, the fuzzy edges of regulatory takings doctrine have grown crisper. No longer a battleground for disputes over regulatory motivation, wisdom, and validity, the takings analysis now...

The Pakistan Supreme Court’s Use of Suo-Motu Actions in Environmental Cases

Natural resources, such as clean air and water, are public resources shared by all, yet owned by no one in particular. Since public resources are not sold in a free marketplace, they have no free market value that takes into...