Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Case Study: Standing and Injury in Action Against Environmental Regulations, Slides of Administrative Law

The legal requirements for a party to bring a suit against administrative actions related to environmental regulations, specifically the clean air act. It explores the concept of standing, which requires the plaintiff to demonstrate a concrete and personal injury, and the procedural rights accorded to litigants. The document also touches upon the role of states as plaintiffs and the issue of causation.

Typology: Slides

2012/2013

Uploaded on 01/30/2013

dipeshh
dipeshh 🇮🇳

4.4

(28)

73 documents

1 / 11

Toggle sidebar

Related documents


Partial preview of the text

Download Case Study: Standing and Injury in Action Against Environmental Regulations and more Slides Administrative Law in PDF only on Docsity! Lad Standing in This Case ® Docsity.com Case and Controversy  "While it does not matter how many persons have been injured by the challenged action, the party bringing suit must show that the action injures him in a concrete and personal way. This requirement is not just an empty formality. It preserves the vitality of the adversarial process by assuring both that the parties before the court have an actual, as opposed to professed, stake in the outcome, and that the legal questions presented ... will be resolved, not in the rarified atmosphere of a debating society, but in a concrete factual context conducive to a realistic appreciation of the consequences of judicial action." 504 U. S., at 581 (Lujan) Docsity.com Does Plaintiff have to show that the rule will solve global warming?  Sugar Cane Growers:  "A [litigant] who alleges a deprivation of a procedural protection to which he is entitled never has to prove that if he had received the procedure the substantive result would have been altered. All that is necessary is to show that the procedural step was connected to the substantive result"  Why is this going to be critical for a global warming case? Docsity.com Do the same standing requirements apply to states as to individuals?  " This is a suit by a State for an injury to it in its capacity of quasi-sovereign. In that capacity the State has an interest independent of and behind the titles of its citizens, in all the earth and air within its domain. It has the last word as to whether its mountains shall be stripped of their forests and its inhabitants shall breathe pure air."  Justice Holmes explained in Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co., 206 U. S. 230, 237 (1907)  Did anyone notice this case in lower court litigation?  Why not? Docsity.com What is the particularized injury that Mass claims to its own lands?  Because the Commonwealth "owns a substantial portion of the state's coastal property," it has alleged a particularized injury in its capacity as a landowner. The severity of that injury will only increase over the course of the next century: If sea levels continue to rise as predicted, one Massachusetts official believes that a significant fraction of coastal property will be "either permanently lost through inundation or temporarily lost through periodic storm surge and flooding events."  Sound familiar? Docsity.com The Remedy  Does redressability require that the remedy fix all the plaintiff's problems?  What does the court remind us about the factual arguments in this case as it sums up? Have these been tested in court?  What does the court say Mass has standing to do? Docsity.com The Dissent  What is the heart of the dissent's belief that this is a political question?  Is there merit to this argument?  Will US auto emissions standards affect global warming in a measurable, as opposed to theoretical way?  Does this meet the traditional tests for redressablity?  This was a 5-4, Stevens driven case - will it survive? Docsity.com
Docsity logo



Copyright © 2024 Ladybird Srl - Via Leonardo da Vinci 16, 10126, Torino, Italy - VAT 10816460017 - All rights reserved