Menu
Institute for Policy Integrity logo

In the News

Viewing all news in Opinion
  • An Unprecedented Attack on Climate Science in the Courts

    Two pending lawsuits — led respectively by Louisiana’s Jeff Landry and Missouri’s Eric Schmitt — not only mount an unprecedented and dangerous attack on science, but also bungle bedrock legal principles. The lawsuits challenge the federal interagency working group’s ongoing assessment of the social cost of carbon, which estimates the incremental cost to society of a unit of greenhouse gas emissions.

  • Top Contributor Essays of 2021

    The Regulatory Review is pleased to highlight our top regulatory essays of 2021 authored by a select number of our many expert contributors. Pieces written by Policy Integrity's Justin Gundlach, Peter Howard, and Richard Revesz are featured in the list.

  • Louisiana Climate Lawsuit Is Parade of Damaging Mischaracterizations

    A federal court in Louisiana heard oral argument Dec. 7 in a case brought by Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry (R) that is gaining national attention. The case seeks to prevent federal agencies from considering scientific estimates of climate change impacts. It could have profound consequences, but not the ones Landry suggests. While Landry’s lawsuit is cloaked in hyperbole about federal takeovers and taxes, no such risks exist. But the suit does threaten to upset settled, bipartisan principles of administrative law.

  • What the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Can Do to Address Environmental Justice

    Policy Integrity’s comments make two categories of recommendations: (1) improving public participation, and (2) improving analysis.

  • It’s Time for the Postal Service to Go Electric

    Getting greener mail trucks would help combat climate change — and all of the Postal Service’s competitors are doing it.

  • How EPA Can Take a Step Forward on Environmental Justice

    But what would serious distributional analysis look like? As we explained in our recent comments on EPA’s Draft Strategic Plan for 2022–2026, serious distributional analysis requires that an agency consider the distributional consequences of multiple regulatory alternatives.

  • Climate Change Comes to Insurance

    By changing the underlying risk profile of certain insurance products, climate change threatens insurers’ business model. At the same time, insurers also face risk as investors, as insurers’ assets may be overvalued due to unassigned climate risk. Improved data, research and resilience planning can contribute to a more robust and more equitable insurance system, while improving financial disclosure requirements can limit investment risk.

  • Yes, Curbing U.S. Fossil Fuel Extraction Does Reduce Climate Pollution

    With experts worldwide calling on governments to transition away from fossil fuels to prevent catastrophic levels of climate change, the Biden Administration is in the midst of reconsidering the federal government’s oil, gas, and coal leasing programs. Reforms to these programs could bring U.S. energy policy closer in line with climate reality by reducing the extraction of fossil fuels from public lands.

  • Regulatory Comments and the Major Questions Doctrine

    The U.S. Supreme Court has rarely invoked the “major questions” doctrine to invalidate agency regulations. But without any regard for the Court’s jurisprudence, the Trump Administration routinely relied on this doctrine in service of its deregulatory assault on the administrative state. Moreover, the Trump Administration opportunistically relied on arbitrary and irrational metrics—including the number of public comments a rule received—to advance major questions objections against rules it disfavored.

  • The EPA’s New Climate Rule Avoids an Old Mistake

    The new methane rule goes beyond merely undoing the damage of the Trump years. The proposal is broader than its Obama-era predecessors, and once finalized, will apply to hundreds of thousands of previously unregulated emission sources, like wells, storage tanks, and compressor station. That is because unlike the prior standards, Biden’s rule will cover equipment of all ages.