Institute for Policy Integrity logo

Twitter @policyintegrity

In the News

  • Trump’s Rule Threatens Booming $4B ‘Restoration Economy’

    January 3, 2019 – Greenwire

    By using data from 1999, the administration ignored any savings those business provided developers, according to Jason Schwartz, legal director at the New York University School of Law’s Institute for Policy Integrity. The lacking analysis underscores how the Trump administration’s pro-industry rhetoric ignores the ecological restoration business, he said.

  • 2019 Outlook: Four Things About Trump’s Push to Deregulate

    December 21, 2018 – Bloomberg Government

    According to a tally of lawsuits by the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law, as of Dec. 10 agencies had won just two out of 24 cases challenging their deregulation, a win rate of 8 percent.

  • On Climate, the Facts and Law Are Against Trump

    December 4, 2018 – The New York Times

    A recent government report predicts dire consequences from climate change. That complicates efforts to weaken environmental laws.

  • For Trump’s Deregulatory Agenda, a Reckoning Nears

    December 3, 2018 – The Wall Street Journal

    Mr. Trump’s ambitious agenda has been slowed, however, by unusually high losses in the courts. Since summer 2017, the Trump administration has lost 20 of 22 court cases challenging its deregulatory actions, according to data compiled by the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law.

  • The Institute for Policy Integrity Brings Economic Sense to Regulatory Debates

    November 30, 2018 – NYU Law News

    The tumultuous state of US environmental regulation during the Trump administration was implicit in the title of the 10th anniversary conference of NYU Law’s Institute for Policy Integrity: “Energy and Environmental Policy: The Quest for Rationality.” But when environmental policy experts convened at the Law School in late September, the two keynote speakers, both seasoned veterans of regulatory battles, articulated reasons for cautious optimism.

  • Trump Administration’s Strategy on Climate: Try to Bury Its Own Scientific Report

    November 25, 2018 – The New York Times

    “This report will be used in court in significant ways,” said Richard L. Revesz, an expert in environmental law at New York University. “I can imagine a lawyer for the Trump administration being asked by a federal judge, ‘How can the federal government acknowledge the seriousness of the problem, and then set aside the rules that protect the American people from the problem?’ And they might squirm around coming up with an answer.”

  • Partisan Politics Over Wise Energy Policy

    November 17, 2018 – The Hill (Opinion)

    The largest expanse of pristine wilderness in the United States, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), is at risk of becoming a staging ground for heavy machinery, with oil drilling projects threatening to displace and damage wildlife and natural ecosystems.

  • Will Trump’s Car Rules Rollback Survive in Court?

    November 9, 2018 – Climatewire

    Richard Revesz, director of the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University, said plaintiffs would likely employ a two-pronged argument to defend the waiver from the Trump administration’s attack.

  • Big Oil Won Big In The Midterm Elections

    November 7, 2018 – BuzzFeed News

    “Our state has spoken loud and clear that we recognize the importance of the industry to the state’s economic well-being,” said Colorado Petroleum Council Executive Director Tracee Bentley, in a statement. The council claimed that passage of the “setback” rule would effectively outlaw new drilling in the state and cost some 150,000 jobs. (Such industry job estimates are almost invariably excessive, an Institute for Policy Integrity study showed in 2012.)

  • Democratic Electoral Gains Will Give a Boost to California in Fight Against Trump

    November 7, 2018 – Los Angeles Times

    “It’s significant that Democrats now have this power,” said Richard Revesz. “A lot of the efforts to roll back Obama administration regulations are on weak legal footing. There are glaring legal or analytical weaknesses. Bringing attention to them can be a good strategy.”