Remove 2013 Remove 2018 Remove Clean Air Act Remove Sea Level
article thumbnail

October 2019 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

Law Columbia

In addition, the court rejected the contention that the Clean Air Act or foreign affairs doctrine completely preempted the plaintiffs’ claims and also indicated that federal common law would not provide a basis for complete preemption. 15-1363 et al. The court said EPA should have consulted with the U.S. California v.

2019 40
article thumbnail

May 2020 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

Columbia Climate Law

Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) 2018 rule in which EPA decided to expand the D.C. EPA’s 2018 rule also suspended the prohibition for companies currently using ozone-depleting substances. In ruling on the challenge to the 2018 rule, the D.C. The court also rejected the contention that the 2018 rule was not final action.

2020 40
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

November 2017 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

Law Columbia

The plaintiffs alleged that Peabody (and a number of other fossil fuel companies) caused greenhouse gas emissions that resulted in sea level rise and damage to their property. The rule took effect on January 17, 2017; on June 15, 2017, BLM issued a notice of postponement of January 17, 2018 compliance dates. Foster , No.

2017 40
article thumbnail

February 2020 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

Law Columbia

The Washington Supreme Court concluded that the Washington Clean Air Act did not grant the Department of Ecology authority to regulate indirect greenhouse gas emissions of businesses and utilities whose products ultimately generate such emissions. 452044/2018 (N.Y. Trump , No. 4:19-cv-00028 (D. WildEarth Guardians v.

2020 40