Chevron USA Inc. V Natural Resources Defense Council Summary

In 2011 Texas, Alabama, Louisiana, Virginia and several other industry groups sued Environmental Protection Agency over a Cross state pollution rule, also known as the transport rule. For years, the Environmental Protection Agency had implemented rules to cut emissions dating back to 1998. They identified twenty-seven states which included Texas that were considered “upwind” states. They believed that these states significantly affected the quality air in “downwind” states. The lawyers for the state argued that the rule would hurt job

The Supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution establishes that the federal constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions. While in this particular matter, the statutes of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would generally trump the state level regulations of organizations such as the California Air Resources Board (CARB), however the EPA has also mandated that “The setting of these pollutant standards was coupled with directing the states to develop state implementation plans (SIPs), applicable to appropriate industrial sources in the state, in order to achieve these standards.” (EPA, 2015) The standards in questions are called National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

The court observed that the ‘legal meaning’, i.e. meaning the legislature is taken to have intended, may not correspond to the literal or grammatical meaning. As four justices put

be described. Jurisdictional requirements for this case as well as the reasons why it was heard at

The Court ruled in favor of the appellant, and the decision is described as follows:

New York, Connecticut, and EPA along with the federal Clean Water Act are ensuring enforcement to see a healthier Sound. The provisions of the federal Clean Water Act provide a vehicle for ensuring that nitrogen reduction targets are legally enforceable. A section of the Act (303(d)) requires the identification of a Total Maximum Daily Load for pollutants that will result in the accomplishment of water quality standards. Once a Total Maximum Daily Load has been established, the act calls for reductions to be allocated to sources so that the

The United States Environmental Protection Agency or EPA was initially proposed in 1970 by then President Richard Nixon. The agency was created to build on other environmental regulations enacted by the federal government and to consolidate those efforts to be managed by one government agency. It was also a reaction to the public’s growing concern over pollution and other environmental issues. Chemical waste was commonly released into bodies of water creating unsafe drinking water and rivers catching fire. Industrial air pollution, such as acid rain and smog, was also affecting manufacturing cities with coal-powered plants. There was little serious regulation on pollution until major environment laws started being passed by Congress in the early sixties.

Under the "plain-meaning" rule, if the intention of the legislature is "so apparent from the face of the statute that there can be no question as to its meaning, there is no need for the court to apply canons of construction" Overseas Education Ass'n v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 876 F.2d 960 (D.C. Cir. 1989). A statute must be construed according to its plain meaning except in extraordinary conditions, which are not present here. Dept. of Housing & Urban Dev. v. Pucker, 122 S. Ct. 1230, 1233 (2002). Silence in a statute regarding a particular topic does not render the statute unclear or ambiguous unless the statute is susceptible of more than one reasonable interpretation. In re Welfare of R.S., 805 N.W.2d 44 (Minn. 2011). Before considering whether the canon of statutory construction should be applied, the district court would first need to determine whether the statute in question is ambiguous. Courts have generally held that a statute is ambiguous when reasonably well-informed persons could understand the language in either of two or more senses State ex rel. Neelen v. Lucas, 24 Wis. 2d 262, 128 N.W.2d 425 (1964). The district court does not indicate that it is applying the canon of statutory construction nor does it state that any portion of the Act is ambiguous such that it promulgated an additional category of private

Legislation to Authorize the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to Accept, as Part of a Settlement, Diesel Emission Reduction Supplemental Environmental Projects : Report (to Accompany S. 2146)." (2008): 1-4. UWSP Library Forward. Web. 01 Jan. 2012.

The 1955 Air Pollution Control Act was the first U.S federal legislation that pertained to air pollution; it also provided funds for federal government research of air pollution.[4] The first federal legislation to actually pertain to "controlling" air

Accordingly, since Clendenin Bros., the policy language has been broadened—seemingly in response to Clendenin Bros. and similar cases—to include not only environmental pollution, but also, substances that are “harmful or toxic to persons [or] property.” The significance of this distinction was recognized in Clipper Mill Fed., LLC v. Cincinnati Ins. Co, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112172 (D.Md. 2010), where a landlord/insured alleged that damages caused by “[t]oxic and dangerous airborne pollutants” attributable to a malfunctioning HVAC unit gave rise to a claim against the insured by a tenant. Id. at 3. In that case, although the pollution at issue was not “environmental,” the District of Maryland observed that:

against an EPA compliance order until the case was brought to the US district court first, then

Improved air quality wasn’t a subject of national concern until the mid 1900s. After decades of coal burning, unregulated gas emissions from cars and the excessive burning of fossil fuels, people started noticing bad air quality as a hazard to their lives. Over several decades, after seeing the costly effects air pollution was having on the environment and people’s health, interest groups like the Friends of The Earth club and the influences of Theodore Roosevelt and Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring finally came together to persuade the government to enforce legislation that would reduce air pollution. Because of these efforts, the policies of the Clean Air Act of 1963 and the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Act of 1965, that aimed to control air pollution and raise air quality standards, helped create the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on December 2, 1970. Since then, the EPA has passed more air quality improvement acts, and amendments to previous acts passed, to increase restrictions on air pollutants, with their main policy concern being the Clean Air Act. Improved air quality acts imposed by the EPA have been successful in cleaning the United States’ air quality by reducing ground-level ozone pollution and reducing emissions, allowing for a decrease in pollution related deaths/illnesses and a better standard of living. The EPA, through regulations and the Clean Air Act, has delivered it’s promise to improve air quality in the United States.

The Clean Air Act in the 1970s enforced to clean out the pollution which started from the Air Pollution Control Act in the mid 1950's as a federal legislation, it involved funds to provide for research on how to control air pollution, soon after created public health services and required to expand their research to monitor the air pollution in the United States. The agency that is responsible for enforcing the law is EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). In the 1990's NESHAP's expanded the program to control the toxic in the air. Also, it sought the protection of the ozone and increased the enforcement authority to expand the research even further. Cleaning the water became EPA’s next goal when the air was polluted so was the water, the Clean

It was not until eight years later when the Clean Air Act of 1963 was passed that the government could take an active role in fighting and regulating air pollution. This act was one of America’s first environmental laws, and it was extremely influential. By 1990, the act would be made up of seven different titles, with each title corresponding with a type of pollution or ways to combat the pollution. When the Clean Air Act was first passed by Congress, it only contained one of the seven titles. The one title it contained was very important as it highlighted a general plan for regulating air pollution, along with more research opportunities and provisions for federal and state funding. In 1967, the Air