Global Warming Litigation: Just a Bunch of Hot Air? Michael D. Freeman August 7, 2008 2008 Annual AWMA Meeting Biloxi, Mississippi Biloxi, Mississippi.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
©2011 Center For Environmental Innovation in Roofing, All Rights Reserved San Jose, CR CARBON POLITICS IN THE US September 28, 2011.
Advertisements

Copyright Holland & Hart LLP All Rights Reserved. The Deseret Power Case and Implications for CO2 Regulation Under the Clean Air Act Presented by.
EPA’s Clean Power Plan Proposed Rules for Reducing GHG Emissions from Power Plants Presentation to ACPAC June 16,
Climate in the Courts: Climate Change Liability and Litigation Tracy D. Hester Bracewell & Giuliani LLP Air & Waste Management Association 13 th Annual.
Public Nuisance Claims for Climate Change Impacts: Preemption, Political Question, and Foreign Policy Concerns Prof. Randall S. Abate Florida Coastal School.
Latham & Watkins operates as a limited liability partnership worldwide with an affiliated limited liability partnership conducting the practice in the.
CURRENT ISSUES IN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW. CLIMATE CHANGE LITIGATION Kirsty Ruddock, Principal Solicitor, ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENDER’S OFFICE NSW 5 May 2010.
State of New Jersey v. EPA A Case Study in Politics v. Statutory Language Mary Ellen Hogan Holme Roberts & Owen LLP Los Angeles, California.
© 2009 Cozen O’Connor. All Rights Reserved. 550 Attorneys 24 Offices AVAILABLE AT Climateofuncertainty.com Amazon.com Bill Stewart |Cozen.
Deborah M. Smith United States Magistrate Judge District of Alaska LAWS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT RELATED TO FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS Second Asian Judges Symposium.
Chapter 18: The Federal Court System Section 1
Latham & Watkins operates as a limited liability partnership worldwide with affiliated limited liability partnerships conducting the practice in the United.
Review Injury in fact Zone of injury Redressiblity.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES/ GOALS/ SWBAT
CMI 9 th Annual Meeting: US Refining Outlook & Climate Policy Implications Jim Keating – BP America, R< February 9 th, 2010.
Chapter 18: The Federal Court System Section 1
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Chevron Analysis.
Constitutional Law Part 4: The Federal Judicial Power Lecture 7: Justiciability – Political Questions.
New Source Review Reform Vera S. Kornylak, Associate Regional Counsel EPA Region 4 Office of Regional Counsel and Gregg Worley, Chief, Air Permits Section,
Supreme Court American Government. The Court  The Supreme Court is the ultimate court of the land  There are 9 judges that make up the Supreme Court.
Texas Lignite Industry. Texas Lignite  Because >95% of lignite mining operations in Texas are in support of electric generation…..whatever impacts the.
Federal Energy and Environmental Regulation Agencies and Laws
© 2008 Torys LLP. All rights reserved. Prospects for Climate Change Litigation John Terry (Torys LLP) and Jeffrey B. Gracer (Sive, Paget & Riesel P.C.)
The Federal Court System Section 1 The Federal Courts and the Judicial Branch Chapter 8.
Since May 2013 Select Clean Air Act Cases. U.S. v. Homer City U.S. v. Midwest Generation, LLC U.S. v. United States Steel CAA Enforcement Cases.
The Inferior Courts.
Overview of Carbon Markets and US Federal Proposals to Regulate GHGs American College of Construction Lawyers and Princeton University Joint Symposium.
Change picture on Slide Master EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases Industrial Energy Consumers of America November 16, 2009 PRESENTED BY Peter Glaserargaret.
Andy Engel and Andy Cook The Hamilton Consulting Group Hamilton-consulting.com.
The American Court System Chapter 3. Why Study Law And Court System? Manager Needs Understanding Managers Involved In Court Cases As Party As Witness.
Overview of Civil Judicial Enforcement. Civil Judicial Enforcement  Who may file civil judicial environmental enforcement actions in U.S.? Federal Government.
Global Warming: Alaska on the Front Lines Frances Raskin Trustees for Alaska Surface Air Temperature Trends Chapman and Walsh, 2004.
American Government and Politics: Deliberation, Democracy, and Citizenship Chapter Sixteen Judiciary.
Liability for Climate Change-Related Damage in Domestic Courts: Claims for Compensation by Elena Kosolapova Centre for Environmental Law University of.
Peter Wulf Member, Commonwealth Administrative Appeals Tribunal, Barrister and Scientist.
The Executive Branch. “The Role of the President”
Change picture on Slide Master The Climate Change Scene in Washington Georgia Traditional Manufacturers Association LaGrange, GA November 5, 2009 PRESENTED.
The Judicial Branch. Copyright 2009 Pearson Education, Inc., Publishing as Longman Understanding the Federal Judiciary The Framers viewed the federal.
EPA's Advance Notice of Proposed Climate Change Regulations: Transportation & Energy Update ©2008, Greenberg Traurig, LLP. Attorneys at Law. All rights.
© 2010 Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Prentice-Hall 1 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND REGULATORY AGENCIES © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as.
Climate litigation & insurance issues The Future of Mass Tort Claims British Institute of International and Comparative Law London, 6 February 2009 Prof.
Update on EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Rulemakings Norman W. Fichthorn Hunton & Williams LLP 2010 American Public Power Association Energy and Air Quality Task.
Sometimes externality problems can’t be solved by private bargaining (transaction costs are too big). Public policy toward externalities. “Command-and-control”
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007) Chevron Analysis.
ANPR Tutorial U.S. Chamber of Commerce October 30, EPA Regulation of CO 2 William L. Kovacs, Vice President Environment, Technology & Regulatory.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW DEBATE CYCLE #2. STATE OF SETONIA (PETITIONER) V. THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (RESPONDENT)
Legal Response to Climate Change Maxine Lipeles Association of Women Faculty February 22, 2008.
GHG LITIGATION Peter Glaser Climate Challenges in the Sunshine State Orlando, FL February 13, 2008.
THE JUDICIAL BRANCH Today’s Objective: C-3 To gather information on the structure of the judicial branch and the ideological tendencies of the Supreme.
Chapter 16 The Federal Courts. Article III: The Judicial Branch Job under Separation of Powers: Job under Separation of Powers: Interpret the Law Marbury.
Intersection of Climate Law, Policy & Science Margaret Claiborne Campbell Troutman Sanders LLP November 16, 2015.
U.S. Climate Policy at the Federal Level Daniel Farber Sho Sato Professor of Law, Berkeley.
Liability for Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Litigation Challenges Zen A. Makuch IC Legal/Centre for Environmental Policy Imperial College, London, UK
US Domestic Policy & The Clean Power Plan ESP 165: Climate Policy Michael Springborn Department of Environmental Science & Policy UC Davis.
2010 National Waterways Conference 50 th Anniversary Annual Meeting Issues Updates: Environmental.
Haifeng Deng Center for Environmental, Nature Resource & Energy Law, Tsinghua University, China.
Clean Air Act Litigation Update State Air Director Meeting May 2015
Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 127 S.Ct (2007)
An Introduction to the Law of Climate Change
EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases: The View from Washington Troutman Sanders LLP/Trinity Consultants July 20, 2010 PRESENTED BY Peter Glaser Troutman.
IMPLICATIONS AND STRATEGIES
Nuisance Tort Litigation
Climate in the Courts: Climate Change Liability and Litigation Tracy D. Hester Bracewell & Giuliani LLP Air & Waste Management Association 13th Annual.
GHG REGULATION & LITIGATION Update
Nuisance Tort Litigation
Nuisance Tort Litigation
Chapter 18: The Federal Court System Section 1
Chapter 18: The Federal Court System Section 1
Climate Change Torts Environmental Law Oct. 9, 2019.
Presentation transcript:

Global Warming Litigation: Just a Bunch of Hot Air? Michael D. Freeman August 7, Annual AWMA Meeting Biloxi, Mississippi Biloxi, Mississippi

Headlines

Climate Change Litigation? Force Government ActionForce Government Action –Massachusetts v. EPA –Center for Biological Diversity v. Kempthorne Stop Government ActionStop Government Action –Friends of the Chattahoochee v. Georgia Department of Natural Resources –In re Deseret Power Electric Coop Regulate or Punish Private ConductRegulate or Punish Private Conduct –Connecticut v. AEP, et al –California v. GM –Comer v. Murphy Oil –Village of Kivalina v. ExxonMobil

Force Government Action Mass v. EPA (April 2, 2007)Mass v. EPA (April 2, 2007) –CO 2 is an “air pollutant” under CAA –EPA must set standards for car emissions if they endanger public health or welfare –Remanded to EPA to make endangerment finding

Force Government Action Center for Biological Diversity v. KempthorneCenter for Biological Diversity v. Kempthorne –Suit to force U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to list polar bear – Polar bear listed as threatened, not endangered threatened, not endangered

Stop Government Action Friends of the Chattahoochee v. Georgia Department of Natural ResourcesFriends of the Chattahoochee v. Georgia Department of Natural Resources –Georgia State Court Judge Thelma Wyatt Cummings Moore overruled state’s issuance of a PSD permit to construct 1200 MW coal-fired power plant. –PSD permits must contain "CO2 emission limitations based on BACT" because, "there is no question that CO2 is 'subject to regulation under the [Clean Air Act].'“ –BACT for a "fossil fuel fired steam electric plant" must include an analysis of alternative technologies

Stop Government Action In re Deseret Power Electric CoopIn re Deseret Power Electric Coop –EPA Region 8 issues PSD for waste-coal-fired generating unit in Bonanza, Utah –Sierra Club challenges permit before EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board –Argues Region 8 erred by failing to (1) require BACT for CO2 and (2) consider alternatives.

Regulate or Punish Private Conduct Connecticut v. AEPConnecticut v. AEP –Suit by New York, Connecticut, et al against five major U.S. electric utilities –Charges utilities with contributing to the public nuisance of global warming –Seeks order capping emissions –Dismissed in 2005 as a political question –Appealed and argued in the 2 nd Circuit

“The Framers based our Constitution on the idea that a separation of powers enables a system of checks and balances, allowing our nation to thrive under a Legislature and Executive that are accountable to the People, subject to judicial review by and independent Judiciary. Cases presenting political questions are consigned to the political branches... not to the Judiciary, and the Judiciary is without power to resolve them. This is one of those cases. [T]he issues presented here require identification and balancing of economic, environmental, foreign policy, and national security interests, ‘an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for nonjudicial discretion’ is required. Indeed, the questions presented here ‘uniquely demand single voiced statement of the Government’s views.’ Thus, these actions present non-justiciable political questions that are consigned to the political branches, not the Judiciary.” Honorable Loretta A. Preska U.S.D.C. for the Southern District of New York Connecticut v. AEP, 406 F. Supp.2d 265 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)

Regulate or Punish Private Conduct California v. General MotorsCalifornia v. General Motors –CA AG sued auto industry seeking to hold them liable for damages from tailpipe emissions –Court dismissed concluding it was up to Congress to deal with the issue –On appeal to Ninth Circuit

Regulate or Punish Private Conduct Comer v. Murphy Oil, et alComer v. Murphy Oil, et al –Class action on behalf of Mississippi residents against oil, coal, utility, and chemical companies –Claim industries emissions of GHGs contributed to global warming, which contributed to Hurricane Katrina’s creation and intensity

“While the plaintiffs argue that this case is not... about global warming, it really is.... It is an important debate, but it is a debate which simply has no place in the court, until such time as Congress enacts legislation which sets appropriate standards by which this Court can measure conduct, whether it be reasonable or unreasonable, and, more important, develops standards by which a group of people, we call them juries, can adjudicate facts and apply the law... It is clear from the complaint and clear from the arguments here today that what you are asking this Court to do is... to balance economic, environmental, foreign policy, and national security interests and make an initial policy determination of a kind which is clearly non-judicial.... These policy decisions are best left to the executive and to the legislative branches of the government, who are not only in the best position to make those decisions but are constitutionally empowered to do so.” Honorable Louis Guirola, Jr. U.S.D.C for the Southern District of MS Comer v. Murphy Oil, et al

BeforeAfter

BeforeAfter

Balch & Bingham’s Gulfport Office

Regulate or Punish Private Conduct Kivalina v. ExxonMobilKivalina v. ExxonMobil –Plaintiff: Native Village of Kivalina, Alaska –Defendants: 24 of the nation’s largest oil and power companies: ExxonMobil, BP, AEP, Duke, Southern Company, et al –Filed: San Francisco, California –Defendants GHGs have caused Kivalina to fall into the sea

Native Village of Kivalina

Michael D. Freeman (205) Questions?