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
It says that “most states appear to be okay with keeping judicial disclosures short on detail and hard to obtain” and it argues, “[w]ith state courts’ power increasing precipitously, stronger oversight tools must be brought to bear.” You need to scroll down and click on “I Want To.
And in any movement, you need a few leaders, a few examples to jump out in front. Across the country we’ve seen a swelling of task forces, work groups, round tables coming out of state bars and state supreme courts, and there are some lessons to be learned from the Virginia experience and their roadmap.
Circuit also rejected two arguments by coal companies against the ACE Rule. First, the court found that EPA made and retained the requisite endangerment finding for regulation of carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Colorado Court Ruled on Venue for Colorado Local Governments’ Climate Change Claims. 1:20-cv-03817 (D.D.C.
The dissent contended that “a federal courtneed not manage all of the delicate foreign relations and regulatory minutiae implicated by climate change to offer real relief, and the mere fact that this suit cannot alone halt climate change does not mean that it presents no claim suitable for judicial resolution.” Richardson v.
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