In , a key US Supreme Court decision broadened standing requirements that permitted suits based on harm to public resources like air, water and forests. By the end of the 70s, citizen lawsuits by non-governmental organisations NGOs against polluters; challenges to government agency actions under the Administrative Procedure Act APA for approving projects like new coal mines or logging projects on federal lands without proper environmental review ; and the development of a strong Environmental Protection Agency EPA had all coalesced under new environmental laws.
In the decades that followed, thousands of environmental suits were filed, and US courts played an important role in enforcing environmental laws. These developments constitute the beginning of environmental public interest law EPIL in the US and have improved the environment and public health significantly.
The EPA has grown to over 15, full-time employees, more than half of which are engineers, scientists, and environmental protection specialists. Environmental quality has improved significantly in the US over the last four decades.
Courts played a key role in enforcing environmental law. Over time, company compliance improved, and state and federal agencies gained strength.
The US experience offers lessons for rapidly developing countries like China. Although China has had environmental laws for over three decades, enforcement has always been a challenge. As in the US, local governments are under pressure to deliver economic development and so often cast a blind eye towards polluters. Until recent years, Chinese courts were hesitant to adjudicate public-interest style suits under existing procedural laws and the Environmental Law.
In addition, jurisdictional barriers for both standing of NGOs and the ability of local courts to hear transboundary pollution cases reduced judicial effectiveness. Suits can be filed at a higher level court, which removes undue local protectionism. Courts have broad remedial powers including injunctions, restoration and natural resource damages.
Furthermore, successful plaintiffs are awarded litigation costs and attorney fees, a key feature behind the success of US citizen suit laws. These changes have resulted in a rise of new cases throughout China. From January to June , courts at all levels accepted public interest environmental cases. This was more cases in the space of 1. Pilot projects authorising the procuratorate to bring environmental cases against government entities have been implemented.
Substantial judgments have been issued against polluters. While NGOs could have standing to bring such cases, to date, perhaps only a dozen have the financial capacity and will to challenge polluters in court. Some of that money is supposed to go to states, who will enforce some of the regulations themselves. What are the most important laws governing the EPA?
The Clean Water Act of tells the EPA to set standards for what pollutants can be released into lakes, streams, and rivers, and it forces polluters to get permits to do so.
When these statutes were passed, they were popular, bipartisan bills. Nixon signed the Clean Air Act in a well-publicized ceremony. The National Environmental Policy Act of NEPA requires the federal government to conduct a lengthy environmental-impact study every time it wants to build, approve, or renovate something. This is partly because it was drafted by environmentalists and quickly signed by Nixon, who sought to give the press a Christmastime distraction from the Watergate scandal.
Because Congress delegated it to the EPA. The EPA can then formulate rules within the purview of that delegated power. Those EPA rules then carry the force of law—but they can still be overturned by a Congressional law, because Congress remains the higher power. This kind of delegation is basically how all executive or independent agencies get power.
Congress often took this approach in the 20th century. Lawmakers of both parties believed that subject-matter experts in technical agencies could make better, more consistently up-to-date regulations than professional legislators.
Because the Constitution is very old, and the idea of the environment is very young. I talked to Jedediah Purdy, a professor of law at Duke University and the author of After Nature , an intellectual history of the environment in America. The environment is a newer idea than the invisible hand, equal justice under law, and freedom of speech. An administrator at the Office of Air and Radiation takes charge of the rule. They also conduct economic modeling of how the new rule might affect the cost of doing business.
This process takes months. Eventually, the consultants report back to the EPA. After a draft rule is published, comments from citizens, activists, nonprofits, and businesses begin to pour into the agency. Legally, an EPA employee or contractor must read, categorize, and respond to each of these comments even if that response is mechanical.
After the Obama administration published a draft Clean Power Plan, its signature climate-focused rule for the power sector, the EPA received more than 4 million public comments. The EPA then modifies the rule again—in response to public comments, to changes in the economy, and to any significant new research on the topic. Because the agency knows it will get sued later. After the EPA publishes a new rule, industry groups often try to weaken the regulation and delay its enforcement in court.
Do the states get a say in regulating pollutants? Generally, the EPA establishes a floor for how strictly a pollutant may be regulated. But there is no ceiling: States can go further if they wish.
Were there any new environmental laws after Nixon left office? Yes, but they mostly tinkered around the edges. In , Congress authorized the EPA to regulate toxic chemicals. In , under President George H. Bush, Congress again amended the Clean Air Act to address new pollutants and the risks of acid rain.
So the United States has gone almost 30 years without major new environmental legislation? During the s, the courts broadly upheld the constitutionality of the big environmental laws—but they declined to expand them. In the early part of the decade, environmental groups hoped that the judiciary would expand environmental protections, just as they had expanded civil-rights protections the decade before.
The courts did not seize the opportunity. In a way, his administration ultimately made the EPA much more powerful because he opposed it so vehemently. The collective goal of US environmental policy is to protect the environment for future generations while interfering as little as possible with the efficiency of commerce or the liberty of the people and to limit inequity related to environmental costs also known as environmental justice.
Laws written by Congress provide the authority for EPA and the other Federal agencies to write regulations. Regulations explain the technical, operational, and legal details necessary to implement Public Laws.
EPA helps regulated entities meet federal requirements, and holds them legally accountable for environmental violations. EPA also issues policy and guidance documents to assist the public and regulated entities. Jump to main content.
0コメント