Menu
Institute for Policy Integrity logo

In the News

  • High Court Rulings Highlight Trump’s Administrative Law Stumbles

    Bethany Davis Noll, who directs NYU’s Institute for Policy Integrity, noted that “Republican-appointed judges are finding against the administration at a similar rate to the Democratic judges.” And these losses at the hands of Republican appointees run the gamut, from immigration to environment to health care. Both the census and DACA cases “went against the administration even though the Supreme Court is majority Republican,” Noll said.

  • Trump Administration’s ‘Sloppy’ Work Has Led to Supreme Court Losses

    The rulings showed that in key instances Trump's administration has been unable to craft high-profile policies that will stand up in court. The administration has lost 79 out of 85 cases involving federal agencies on deregulatory or policy issues tracked by the Institute for Policy Integrity, a think tank connected to New York University School of Law.

  • Citing an Economic Emergency, Trump Directs Agencies Across Government to Waive Federal Regulations

    Even if interest groups battle rollbacks in court, federal officials could just stop enforcing some regulations, said New York University School of Law professor Richard Revesz. “Agencies have a fair amount of discretion of when to bring enforcement actions,” he said.

  • Trump, Citing Pandemic, Moves to Weaken Two Key Environmental Protections

    “At a time when more than 100,000 Americans have died from Covid and we know about this connection, the Trump administration is going to put in place some analytical techniques that will make it easier for them to kill more Americans,” said Richard Revesz, an expert on environmental law at New York University. Mr. Revesz and others said the change also defies the intent of the landmark Clean Air Act of 1970.

  • Undoing the Regulatory Policies of the Trump Administration

    • Richard L. Revesz
    • Bethany A. Davis Noll

    In a recent essay, William Yeatman, a research fellow at the Cato Institute, takes issue with the central conclusions of our recent essay in The Regulatory Review, “Regulatory Rollbacks Have Changed the Nature of Presidential Power.” Yeatman’s discussion of our piece is flawed. Most importantly, he wrongly attributes to us the view that the Trump Administration “has been too effective in rolling back Obama-era rules.” The claim in our article is far narrower and very different.

  • Court Rules U.S. Environment Agency Must Protect States From Upwind Air Pollution

    Richard Revesz of NYU’s School of Law and director of the Institute for Policy Integrity filed the amicus brief on behalf of Maryland and Delaware. He said the ruling made clear the EPA is obligated to prevent states from harming the air quality of their neighboring states when emissions travel downwind and “can’t cite cost as a reason to ignore the law altogether.”

  • Remote Work Is a Huge Opportunity for High-Impact Climate Policy

    • Jayni Foley Hein

    The vanishing of the daily commute has brought to light the burden of cars and trucks on health and the environment. As an intentional effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, at low cost to society, policymakers and businesses should continue to encourage working from home for jobs that allow it, even after the coronavirus crisis has receded.

  • Trump Shows His Cards on Environmental Protections — or a Lack Thereof

    • Richard L. Revesz

    Looking at three proceedings, completed within weeks of one another, exposes the shameless analytic opportunism of the Trump EPA. The result is a slate of deregulatory actions that put thousands of lives at risk each year, cause serious adverse health impacts on many more, and impose net harms on the American people. A heedless commitment to dangerous deregulation is the only logic that explains its actions.

  • The Firm Administering the Coronavirus Rescue Considers Climate Risks in Its Ordinary Investments

    • Madison Condon

    Senate Republicans are worried that BlackRock could take climate change–related financial risks into account in making its securities purchase recommendations, as the firm has pledged to do when shaping its own investment strategies. If BlackRock is going to make the best decisions for American taxpayers, it must be allowed to assess these climate risks as it does for other clients.

  • States Are Facing a New Attack on Clean Energy, But They Can Evade It

    • Sylwia Bialek

    While states are right that new FERC rules will needlessly increase costs and be a drag on clean energy, they shouldn’t rush to exit electricity markets yet. States could meet their climate goals while retaining the benefits of markets by pursuing another option: carbon pricing.