In the News

Incandescent bulbs offer basically no advantages to consumers, and their high electricity demands make them worse for the climate and environment as well. The Biden administration's proposed lightbulb efficiency standards would create enormous value for society, including consumer cost savings and reduced climate pollution.

The Institute for Policy Integrity tracked the Trump administration’s record in court throughout Trump’s four years in office. By its count, the administration was “successful” 58 times, and “unsuccessful” 200 times. That is, just 22 percent of the Trump administration’s regulatory or deregulatory actions that were challenged in court came through the legal process unscathed.

Legal challenges are almost certain for finalized rules that tighten up nitrogen oxides emissions from the freight fleet, but critics looking to take future standards to court will likely face an “uphill battle,” according to Institute for Policy Integrity attorney Meredith Hankins. “Certainly there are costs to the industry, we can’t paper over that, but you can see that the overall net benefits for society under these rules are quite high,” Hankins said.

Rachel Rothschild, legal fellow at the Institute for Policy Integrity, joins Kate and Melissa to recap oral argument in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency. They also recap cases about prescription drugs, tribal casinos, outpatient dialysis, and what happens when a state wants to enforce a law that’s no longer in effect.

Max Sarinsky, a senior attorney with the Institute for Policy Integrity (IPI) at New York University, argues “the district court’s injunction does not require the Department of Energy to scrap its regulations or return to the drawing board. Instead, if this injunction is not quickly lifted, the agency should look at each regulation on a case-by-case basis and determine how to proceed.”

The Methane Rule addresses a market failure to create enormous value for society. Although EPA calculates virtually all conceivable costs of the rule and calculates only one monetary benefit, it still finds that the monetary benefits exceed costs — by $48 billion.

Observers have said the lower court’s injunction could cause important near-term delays to EPA rules including a long-awaited update to heavy truck emissions rules and federal ozone control plans, though they say it is unlikely to entirely block a range of ongoing regulatory activities. “This [ruling] is a big deal,” said New York University’s Institute for Policy Integrity Director Richard Revesz in an interview with Inside EPA’s Climate Extra. But, there are “all kinds of scenarios” for how things play out.

A case argued at the Supreme Court this week—West Virginia v EPA—has potentially huge implications for regulating greenhouse gas emissions. NYU law professor Richard Revesz and Center for Biological Diversity attorney Jason Rylander join the podcast to explain.

Despite West Virginia's attempts to revise regulatory history in West Virginia v. EPA, a major Supreme Court case on the scope of EPA's ability to regulate greenhouse gases, the agency has long regulated air quality by relying on tools such as emissions trading and generation shifting, writes Dena Adler.

A milestone moment occurred in an already historic legal case on Friday, Feb. 18. For the first time in Michigan history, the potential climate impacts of a proposed industrial installation were allowed to be considered during a permit hearing under the Michigan Environmental Protection Act. Witnesses were Peter Erickson, senior scientist and climate policy program director at Stockholm Environment Institute, Peter Howard, economics director at the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law, Elizabeth Stanton, director and senior economist at the Applied Economics Clinic and Jonathan Overpeck, climate scientist and dean of the School for Environment and Sustainability at the University of Michigan.