2016 Paris Agreement Politics Precautionary Principle 
Law Columbia
OCTOBER 7, 2019
The plaintiffs contended that environmental impact statements (EISs) from 2014 and 2016 should have been supplemented with new information about the forest’s natural regeneration and that the biomass plant should have been considered in the same EISs as the logging project. Forest Service violated the National Environmental Policy Act.
Law Columbia
FEBRUARY 10, 2020
The majority said it “reluctantly” concluded that “the plaintiffs’ case must be made to the political branches or to the electorate at large” and “[t]hat the other branches may have abdicated their responsibility to remediate the problem does not confer on Article III courts, no matter how well-intentioned, the ability to step into their shoes.”
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
40 
Let's personalize your content