Menu
Institute for Policy Integrity logo

In the News

  • As EPA Proposes Tailpipe Rule, Legal Battle Well Underway

    “It's tricky to know how it's going to play out until the Supreme Court decides another major questions case,” said Meredith Hankins, a senior attorney at New York University's Institute for Policy Integrity, which supports the Biden EPA's rules.
    But Hankins said both the near-term rule and EPA’s forthcoming post-2027 regulation are extending strategies used in prior rules.
    “EPA has been issuing these greenhouse gas regulations for almost 15 years at this point,” they said. “And every single rule, they've indicated that they expect increasing numbers of electric vehicles.”

  • A Revolution in Cost-Benefit Rules

    Under its new administrator, Richard Revesz, OIRA issued draft regulations drastically revising Circular A-4 for the first time in 30 years, substituting more realistic methods for weighing benefits against costs. Revesz, a law professor and onetime dean at NYU, is highly qualified for the job, having long been one of the leading scholarly critics of the misuse of cost-benefit analysis.

  • Logging Plan on Yellowstone’s Border Shows Limits of Biden Greenhouse Gas Policy

    Last month, the U.S. Forest Service decided to move forward with a logging project on the border of Yellowstone National Park without applying the new White House guidance, which would have involved a detailed projection of the resulting greenhouse gas emissions. “There’s no perfect way to contextualize greenhouse gas emissions,” said Max Sarinsky, senior attorney at the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law. “I think the ways that CEQ suggests—particularly, the social costs of greenhouse gases and considering carbon budgets and climate commitments—is really a thoughtful way to show what the emissions mean.” 

  • Court Rejects Louisiana Challenge to Biden Climate Metric

    The Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law, which had backed the Biden administration in the 5th Circuit litigation, celebrated the court’s ruling. “Louisiana’s lawsuit against the government’s climate-damage valuations was doomed from the start due to a lack of standing,” Max Sarinsky, senior attorney for the institute, wrote in an email. “Although the challengers briefly prevailed last year, the district court decision granting their requested relief was widely derided across the political spectrum for misapplying legal doctrines, mischaracterizing facts (including a Constitutional provision), and prioritizing unsupported allegations over Nobel Prize-winning economics.”

  • Allies Seek To Bolster NHTSA Legal Defense Of Its Fuel Efficiency Rule

    Two key Hill Democrats and a legal think tank are backing the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) against fuels sector and GOP states’ legal claims that the agency improperly factored zero emission vehicles (ZEV) into its baseline for fuel economy standards, building on the agency’s defense in the suit. An amicus brief from New York University’s Institute for Policy Integrity (IPI) builds upon NHTSA’s arguments that EPCA does not preempt accounting for ZEV deploying in the regulatory baseline.

  • FERC Gets Advice, Criticism on Environmental Justice

    In a panel addressing how the FERC can incorporate environmental justice communities into their infrastructure permitting, Al Huang, director of environmental justice at the New York University School of Law’s Institute for Policy Integrity, said, “FERC needs to demonstrate a foundational commitment to environmental justice, and that means identifying who EJ communities are, engaging with them, providing support for them [and] building trust. Building that foundation can yield substantive advantages such as … identifying viable alternatives to opposed projects that can mitigate adverse impacts, and fully understanding the vulnerabilities that communities might face."

  • Life at 3° C

    In this episode, we attempt to illustrate what daily life could be like as the earth warms to 3°C.  Dr. Peter Howard of the Institute for Policy Integrity discusses some of the likely economic and societal changes.

  • New York Considers First-in-the-Nation Bill to Charge Fossil Fuel Companies for Climate Change Destruction

    Known as the Climate Change Super Fund, the legislation was included in the Senate’s one-house budget proposal, but didn’t make it into the Assembly’s proposition. Lawmakers are pushing for the bill to make it into the final budget due April 1. Rachel Rothschild, who provided legal research for New York’s superfund bill, said fossil fuel companies will most likely fight the legislation by claiming carbon emissions are an international problem, not a state issue.

  • EDF Joins Dozens Of Other Leaders To Defend EPA’s Clean Car Standards In Court

    A massive coalition of health, environmental and civic groups – including Environmental Defense Fund – laid out a full-throated defense of EPA’s clean car standards in a brief filed today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

  • Immediate Options to Address Environmental Disparities in Cost-Benefit Analysis

    As it is currently performed, cost-benefit analysis generally undercounts many benefits both to society at large and to vulnerable communities in particular. Before resolving how to consider equity as part of cost-benefit analysis, there are improvements we can make within the existing cost-benefit framework to ensure that health and environmental benefits to society at large — and to marginalized communities in particular — are sufficiently considered.