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
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. PJM therefore concluded that there was a public need for the project, based on FERC-approved methods for determining public need.
51] That doctrine only applies to federal regulations, however, not to state statutes, so it does not pose a danger to the two California bills. Moreover, the Supreme Court recently signaled again that states are free to enact environmental laws that may be beyond federal powers. [52] cit [50] See, e.g., WestVirginia v.
Justice John Paul Stevens set out a two-part test for courts to review an agency’s interpretation of a statute it administers. If it has not, the court must uphold the agency’s interpretation of the statute as long as it is reasonable.
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.
In its legislative findings, which remain in air quality statutes today , Congress justified air pollution regulation because “the growth of the amount and complexity of air pollution brought about by urbanization, industrial development, and the increasing use of motor vehicles, has resulted in mounting dangers to the public health and welfare.”
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