Institute for Policy Integrity logo

In the News

Viewing all news in Opinion
  • Achieving Climate Goals Through Tax Policy: Why Public Interest Stakeholder Input Is Important

    The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) includes the most significant investment in climate that Congress has ever made. Getting input from a range of relevant stakeholders will help Treasury and the IRS ensure the IRA meets its goals. Building off Mike Kaercher’s remarks at the Institute for Policy Integrity’s conference A New Era of Climate & Energy Policy, this post provides a brief overview of the climate provisions, discusses the importance of public interest stakeholder contributions in implementing them, and presents two examples of high-priority projects that could benefit substantially from public interest stakeholder input.

  • ‘West Virginia v. EPA’ Will Shape, But Not Stop, Power Plant Regulation

    After the Supreme Court handed down its decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) earlier this year, many speculated on what it does—and does not—mean for future power plant rules. One key point is clear: the decision will shape, but not stop, power plant regulation, writes Attorney Dena Adler.

  • After West Virginia, the Major Questions Doctrine Remains Limited to Extraordinary Cases

    The major questions doctrine boils down to the following: under rare circumstances that would transform the underlying statute, the Court may depart from its normal approach to agency deference and look more skeptically on agency authority in the absence of clear congressional authorization. Many have noted the ill-defined parameters of this interpretive principle,1 but one key feature is not reasonably in dispute: it remains the exception, not the rule.

  • Is the Inflation Reduction Act the End of the Wholesale Clean Attribute Market?

    The IRA may reduce any real or perceived tension between wholesale markets and state policies and the need for other mechanisms to harmonize wholesale markets and state policies.

  • Liquefied Natural Gas Reviews: Reforms for Rigorous and Durable Decisionmaking

    After a meteoric rise in production over the past decade, the United States has become the largest exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG) in the world. Yet, the analysis behind LNG terminal and export approvals overlooks climate and environmental justice impacts, despite promises of imminent reform. Policy Integrity’s new report provides a comprehensive look at the Department of Energy’s (DOE) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) past practice in this space and offers recommendations for improving their review of the climate and environmental justice impacts of LNG approvals.

  • Major Questions About Climate Regulation

    Shortly after his inauguration, President Biden promised to reduce climate pollution in every sector of the economy. One obstacle to achieving this goal: the Trump Administration. Although President Trump is no longer in office, the way the Trump Administration approached Obama-era regulations may have developed a blueprint for states and industry groups to challenge climate regulations adopted by the Biden Administration, warn Richard L. Revesz of NYU School of Law and Natasha Brunstein, a student at Yale Law School. Revesz and Brunstein argue that the Trump Administration manipulated what lawyers and judges have come to refer to as a “major questions” doctrine to justify striking down any regulation it disfavored.

  • Doomed Legislative Challenge to Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases Risks Misinforming Public

    A recently introduced bill aiming to prevent federal agencies from considering the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases highlights the role some bills play in informing — and sometimes misinforming — the public. Though almost certainly destined to fail, the bill presents faulty and misleading criticisms that could have chilling effects on important policy evaluation efforts.

  • How Will EPA Regulate the Power Sector?

    The ruling [West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)] is a blow to climate action and could signal the court’s hostility to a wide range of future regulations within and beyond the climate and environmental sphere, including those related to consumer protection and worker safety. Although the immediate effects on US climate policy aren’t pervasive, EPA now needs to evaluate the emissions-reduction potential and legal risks of alternative regulatory approaches for the power sector.

  • The SEC’s Climate-Risk Disclosure Rule Is Not Novel. And That’s a Good Thing.

    In response to investor demand, the SEC recently proposed a rule that would require publicly traded companies to share information about their exposure to climate-related financial risks. However, this common-sense rule is not without controversy. Since the Supreme Court applied the major questions doctrine in an important climate decision a few weeks ago, critics of the proposed rule have been arguing that it is relevant here too. But the climate-risk disclosure rule is clearly outside of the scope of the major questions doctrine. Far from being transformative or extraordinary, the SEC’s proposed rule is a run-of-the-mill use of the SEC’s authority with ample precedent.

  • The Supreme Court Hasn’t Killed the Biden Administration’s Climate Agenda, But Its Latest Decision Casts a Shadow

    Why would the Court’s conservative majority bother striking down a dead rule? There are two potential reasons—one that creates a barrier for future power-sector rules, and another that looms as a potential threat to a broader swath of other climate and public safeguards.