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
In 2021, the District Court ruled that the Berkeley ordinance was not preempted by EPCA , rejecting the notion that EPCA preempts local ordinances that do “not facially address any of those [energy conservation or energy use] standards.” Under EPCA, the U.S. Berkeley has not yet said whether it will appeal the Ninth Circuit’s ruling.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. On November 23, GM announced that it was withdrawing from the litigation. By Margaret Barry and Korey Silverman-Roati.
Share Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims in Alaska — “Indian tribe[s]” under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act? On Monday, the Supreme Court will hear argument on that question in Yellen v.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. 1442, or the civil-rights removal statute, 28 U.S.C. Derivative Litigation , No. and non-U.S. 19-1189 (U.S.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. Alaska Federal Court Vacated Federal Approvals of Major Oil Development Project in National Petroleum Reserve. Alaska Aug.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS. Alaska Oil & Gas Association v. In re: Border Infrastructure Environmental Litigation , No.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. 1442, or the civil-rights removal statute, 28 U.S.C. Alaska, filed Dec. By Margaret Barry and Korey Silverman-Roati.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. The Court’sdecision concerned the interpretation of 28 U.S.C. By Margaret Barry and Korey Silverman-Roati. and non-U.S.
climate litigation database , and looks ahead at what we may see next. With some exceptions, federal agencies formerly defending Biden administration climate actions requested that the cases be held in abeyance to allow new political leadership time to be briefed on the litigation and to determine how to proceed.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. Circuit majority opinion’s interpretation was foreclosed by the statute and violated separation of powers. and non-U.S.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. s consumer protection statute. By Margaret Barry and Korey Silverman-Koati. and non-U.S.
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