Search icone
Search and publish your papers

Massachussets versus Environmental Protection Agency

Or download with : a doc exchange

About the author

Level
General public

About the document

Published date
Language
documents in English
Format
Word
Type
law case
Pages
4 pages
Level
General public
Accessed
0 times
Validated by
Committee Oboolo.com
0 Comment
Rate this document
  1. Did the petitioners had standing to sue?
    1. Conditions required for a litigant to have standing
    2. Standing conditions are completed by the petitioners according to the court
  2. EPA has authority to regulate Carbon dioxide emission and can not refuse to consider the petition
    1. EPA has the statutory authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles according to the court
    2. EPA's reasons to explain its refusal to regulate carbon dioxide are inconsistent with the statute
  3. A controversy decision
    1. Massachusetts should not have had standing according to Chief Justice Roberts
    2. EPA were right to deny the petition and had no standing to regulate greenhouse gases according to Justice Scalia

This decision dealt with environmental matters and was regarded as one of the most important environmental Supreme Court decisions in years. If one in the present age delves into this case, the insights would have a grave impact on the pollution control and globalization boom. The case begins with the State of Massachusetts and several other states, cities and environmental groups that petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).The petition was based on requesting EPA to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases from new motor vehicles that contributed elaborately to global warming. Massachusetts argued that the Clean Air Act required EPA to regulate these ?greenhouse gases.' This act states that Congress must regulate ?any air pollutant' that can ?reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.' However, the case proceeds when EPA denied the petition, claiming that the Clean Air Act does and did not authorize the Agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. EPA added that even if it did execute this responsibility, the Agency had the discretion to defer a decision until more research could be executed on ?the causes, extent and significance of climatic changes and the potential options for addressing it.' Massachusetts appealed the denial of the petition to the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and a divided panel ruled in favor of EPA. The case was then brought before the United States Supreme court. The court had to answer three questions. The first question stressed on whether the petitioners had a standing to sue. The second question was whether EPA had the authority to regulate the emission of greenhouse gases. Finally, whether the reason alleged by EPA was to deny the petition that was consistent.

Top sold for international law

Critically discuss the contributions of the Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL)...

 Law & contracts   |  International   |  Term papers   |  05/13/2009   |   .doc   |   6 pages

Recent documents in international law category

International competition law: extraterritoriality matters, conflicts of decisions

 Law & contracts   |  International   |  Course material   |  02/20/2019   |   .doc   |   6 pages

How the "author's rights" are treated domestically under the law of France and how "copyright" is...

 Law & contracts   |  International   |  Case study   |  10/14/2015   |   .pdf   |   15 pages