PLF challenge to Corps and EPA water rule heats up

When we filed our complaint challenging the Corps and EPA’s extreme redefinition of “waters of the United States” subject to federal control under the Clean Water Act, we noted that more suits would be filed.  So far, at least 10 … Continue reading

Courting Liberty Podcast on WOTUS Lawsuit

PLF is suing over the feds’ sweeping new definition of “waters of the United States,” which is so broad that it could impose The Clean Water Act on virtually any water – and land – anywhere. Click here to listen … Continue reading

It is almost never “rational, never mind ‘appropriate’” to ignore regulatory costs

Today’s Supreme Court decision in Michigan, et al. v. EPA (consolidated with Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA and National Mining Assoc. v. EPA) invalidated EPA’s regulation on electric power plant hazardous air pollutants for not taking its enormous costs … Continue reading

There are many ways to protect endangered species

If species aren’t protected under the Endangered Species Act’s burdensome approach, they’ll receive no protection at all. This is an all too common refrain. But it’s a false choice. There are many ways to try to conserve and recover species. … Continue reading

Is it the Commerce Clause or the Future Commerce Clause?

The Utah prairie dog regulation prohibits the “take” (harassing, hunting, etc.) of prairie dogs on private land. The federal government, which has only the enumerated powers granted to it by the Constitution, says it can regulate purely intrastate species like … Continue reading

It’s good to have friends

Many friend-of-the-court briefs have been filed supporting People for the Ethical Treatment of Property Owners‘ challenge to the federal government’s unconstitutional Utah prairie dog regulation. These briefs are a reminder of how important the issue is and how unnecessary the … Continue reading

My congressional testimony this week: EPA’s Science Advisory Board

On Wednesday, May 20, 2015, I testified before a senate subcommittee seeking to make EPA’s Science Advisory Board more transparent, effective, and fair.  The senate bill at issue, S. 543, is being proffered in response to criticism that EPA is not using the Board properly to provide peer review of the scientific bases of its regulatory proposals.  My testimony criticized EPA’s failure to send proposed regulations governing carbon dioxide emissions to the Board for expert analysis before finalizing the rules.  IMG_0208_kpCarbon dioxide is a  natural substance that is everywhere and in everything.  By regulating that ubiquitous substance, EPA gives itself the potential authority to regulate virtually everything, everywhere.  That is an unprecedented reach for power by a federal administrative agency.  Accordingly, if anything merits peer review from the top scientific experts, it is the scientific analysis forming the foundation of EPA’s carbon dioxide regulatory proposals.  For more details, see my written and oral (time stamp 41) testimony.

Is the Constitution a paradox?

In defending the constitutionality of the Utah prairie dog regulation, the government makes a paradoxical claim. Conceding that federal intrusions into areas of traditional state authority are unconstitutional, the government nonetheless argues that the Necessary and Proper Clause allows the … Continue reading

Is Chief Justice Roberts anti-environment?

To honor Chief Justice Robert’s first decade on the Supreme Court — more like castigate him — the Constitutional Accountability Center has released a series of papers on the court’s jurisprudence. The most recent of which addresses the court’s environmental … Continue reading