The Yale Law Journal’s new “Summary Judgment” online series features a set of essays on the Supreme Court’s decision in American Electric Power v. Connecticut, in which the Court held unanimously that suits against utilities alleging their emissions of greenhouse gases contribute to the “public nuisance” of global warming under federal common law were displaced by the Clean Air Act. Contributors to the online symposium include Hari Osofsky, Daniel Farber, James May, Maxine Burkett, Michael Gerrard, and yours truly. My contribution, “A Tale of Two Cases” (PDF), discusses how the outcome in AEP was predetermined by the Court’s prior holding in Massachusetts v. EPA that greenhouse gases were pollutants subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act. The essay is based on a longer article forthcoming in the Cato Supreme Court Review that I will discuss at the Cato Constitution Day event on Thursday.
Originally posted at The Volokh Conspiracy.A Tale of Two Cases
Date
Topics
Related Content
-
New Report Outlines 10 Solutions for Improving the Endangered Species Act for its 50th Anniversary
Ahead of the 50th Anniversary of the Endangered Species Act this December, a new report from PERC, explores creative ideas to improve the landmark law’s conservation outcomes.
-
A Field Guide for Wildlife Recovery
The Endangered Species Act's Elusive Search to Recover Species—and What to Do About It.
-
Robert Exley McCormick, PERC Senior Fellow, 1946-2023
What truly distinguished Bobby was his generosity of spirit.