This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Supreme Court in WestVirginia v. Environmental Protection Agency has shed light on how the court's decision could significantly limit the federal government's efforts to address climate change, and reshape administrativelaw and the separation of powers, say Matthew Sinkman and Andrew Alessandro at Gibbons.
The FCC has already issued such an extension three times since the initial compliance deadline of May 26, 2015, as the NAB contends that there still is no workable technology that can perform the functions required by the rule (see our Broadcast Law Blog article here from the last extension 5 years ago).
PJM determined that a project proposed by Transource consisting of new transmission lines running from WestVirginia to Maryland would reduce this congestion and provide net positive economic benefits. The Supremacy Clause serves to “ invalidate[] state law that interferes with or is contrary to federal law.”
The law would mesh with corporate climate disclosure regulations elsewhere, particularly in Europe, and would therefore represent a significant step toward assuring the accuracy, trustworthiness, and transparency of corporate climate performance reporting. 4] The new corporate climate disclosure bills may well continue that tradition.
The US Supreme Court Thursday ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not have the authority under section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act to enforce proposed power plant emission limitations in WestVirginia v. ” In WestVirginia v.
Share The Supreme Court will hear oral argument on Wednesday in a case involving the deference that courts should give to federal agencies’ interpretations of the laws that they administer. From health care to finance to environmental pollutants, administrative agencies use highly trained experts to interpret and carry out federal laws.
After Dobbs was accepted, advocates sought to enjoin a Texas law that banned abortion after just six weeks. The court ruled 5-4 to allow the Texas law to be enforced. The Biden administration and other litigants then forced a reconsideration of that decision. Bruen is a virtual heart attack for gun control advocates.
Petitioners also argue that the potential economic and political ramifications of the standards are so great that EPA’s rule violates the so-called “major questions doctrine,” a relatively new and quickly evolving concept in administrativelaw. This doctrine was recently and prominently applied by the Supreme Court in WestVirginia v.
Joe Manchin of WestVirginia became the first Democrat to formally oppose her confirmation. For a further discussion of Sohn’s withdrawal and its implications for broadcast regulation, see the article on our Broadcast Law Blog, here. If you have C-Band earth stations, review this notice for more details.
The Scramble to Identify Major Questions in AdministrativeLaw In its June 2022 decision in WestVirginia v. The WestVirginia majority opinion suggests a two-prong framework for the major questions doctrine. (A Nebraska , invalidating the Biden Administration’s student loan forgiveness program.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content