Menu
Institute for Policy Integrity logo

Recent Projects

  • Amicus Brief on the SAFE Rule

    We filed an amicus brief explaining how NHTSA and EPA's decision to finalize a rule that, even under their own analysis, will be net-costly to society, is arbitrary and capricious. 

    Read more

  • Bostock and the End of the Climate Change Double Standard Cover

    Bostock and the End of the Climate Change Double Standard

    Guided by the blueprint of all three Bostock opinions, this article, published in the Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, performs a deep dive into the legislative materials surrounding the enactment of the Clean Air Act of 1970, uncovering a treasure trove of sources that had not previously been part of the public discourse. It shows how, under the interpretive approach of each of the three opinions, greenhouse gases are unquestionably pollutants for the purposes of the Clean Air Act. Because the approaches in the majority and dissents in Bostock—and thus a majority of the current Court—all point in the same direction, the era of greenhouse gas exceptionalism should now be over.

    Read more

  • Comments on OCC’s Fair Access Financial Services Rule

    The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) proposed a rule that would preclude banks from taking climate risks into account when making decisions regarding the provision of financial services. We submitted joint comments explaining how OCC fails to consider or justify serious costs imposed by the rule. Climate risks pose a significant threat to the economic and operational health of firms in the energy sector and to the stability of the financial system as a whole.

    Read more

  • Amicus Briefs on Navigable Waters Protection Rule

    In April, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers published the Navigable Waters Protection Rule, which considerably restricts the waters and wetlands that are federally protected under the Clean Water Act. We filed briefs in the Northern District of California and District of South Carolina focusing on the agencies’ economic analysis, which the agencies use to obscure the rule’s anticipated harms. We later filed in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Northern District of New York, the District of Massachusetts, and the District of Maryland.

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on Climate Effects from Cross-State Air Pollution Rule

    In its proposal, Revised Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS, the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) unreasonably low valuation of climate effects contributes to its selection of an inefficient policy alternative. We submitted joint comments detailing how EPA's flawed analysis harms public health and the environment.

    Read more

  • Building a New Grid Without New Legislation Cover

    Building a New Grid Without New Legislation

    A Path to Revitalizing Federal Transmission Authorities

    In the absence of legislation, critical long-distance transmission can be developed by applying existing federal legal authorities. A number of important regulatory and commercial measures have been proposed, including streamlining transmission planning, upgrading existing transmission system components, putting transmission lines underground, and using existing rights-of-way from highways and railroads. Even if these solutions are adopted, however, state siting requirements may prove an important obstacle to developing an efficient, national transmission grid. So, this paper examines legal authorities already available to the Department of Energy and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to develop the interstate transmission capacity crucial to the energy transition.

    Read more

  • Amicus Brief in D.C. Circuit on Methane Limits for Oil and Gas Sector

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently finalized revisions to New Source Performance Standards for methane and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from the oil and natural gas sector. We filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, focusing on EPA's flawed legal and economic justifications for the rule. 

    Read more

  • Comments on HHS’s Sunset Rule

    The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has proposed to retrospectively and prospectively establish an "expiration date" for each of its regulations. Under the proposed rule, regulations would be automatically rescinded unless HHS first completes a restrospective review of the regulation's effects on small entities pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We submitted comments criticizing the proposal, which is neither lawful nor rational.

    Read more

  • Report Series: the Flawed Analysis Underlying the Rollback of the Clean Car Standards

    The Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration used several gimmicks and faulty assumptions to skew the analysis of the rollback rule, obscuring just how harmful it is to the American public. We published a series of reports examining several of the flaws.

    Read more

  • Ninth Circuit Affirms Injunctions of Public Charge Rule

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the Department of Homeland Security’s “Public Charge” rule is both contrary to statute and arbitrary and capricious. Our amicus brief in the case played a key role in shaping the decision. The Ninth Circuit adopts our core arguments, emphasizing how Homeland Security fails to assess the rule's harms and draws conclusions that are contradicted by the record.

    Read more