FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3124054460> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3124054460 startingPage "1" @default.
• W3124054460 abstract "Since global warming potentially affects everyone in the world, does any individual have standing to sue the U.S. EPA or other federal agencies to force them to address climate change issues? Suits addressing global warming raise difficult standing questions because some Supreme Court decisions have stated or implied courts should not allow standing for plaintiffs who file suits alleging general injuries to the public at large because the political branches of government - Congress and the executive branch - are better equipped to resolve such issues. There is a better argument, however, for courts to recognize standing for plaintiffs who suffer mass injuries, including any physical harms are more likely than not caused by global warming. Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), courts should use a reasonable possibility standard to determine whether a federal agency must discuss the possible impact of its actions on global warming. In 2003, the EPA concluded the Clean Air Act does not give the Agency authority to regulate carbon dioxide, although several states are challenging conclusion. Even if the EPA cannot regulate carbon dioxide directly, there is a strong argument the Agency must consider carbon dioxide emissions when power plants apply for a permit under the source process. Under the Administrative Procedure Act and general standing principles, a plaintiff who suffers small, but tangible injuries should have standing under the Clean Air Act. A concurring opinion in a recent decision involving chemicals cause global destruction of stratospheric ozone addressed the difficult issue of whether a plaintiff may have standing to sue those who contribute in a small ways to global pollution problems. In Covington v. Jefferson County, the Ninth Circuit held the plaintiffs had standing to bring citizen suits under the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the local injuries caused by the defendants from improper disposal of ozone destroying chemicals at a landfill. In a concurring opinion, Judge Gould concluded the plaintiffs had standing to sue based on the global impacts on stratospheric ozone resulting from the defendants' mishandling of CFCs. Some courts, especially in taxpayer suits, had suggested a plaintiff may not assert standing if an alleged injury harms all persons equally, or in other words, that injury to all is injury to none. On the whole, Judge Gould determined the Supreme Court's most recent standing cases have allowed a plaintiff to achieve standing resulting from general injury if the injury to the plaintiff is sufficiently concrete. Judge Gould concluded the risk of skin cancer, cataracts and suppressed immune systems to the plaintiffs was sufficiently concrete to justify Article III standing even though the defendants' only contributed a small amount of harm to a global problem. But global warming suits present more complex issues. This Article concludes at least some plaintiffs with concrete injuries, i.e., Alaskan natives, have standing to file global warming suits under either the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) or the CAA. Today, the strongest case for standing by climate change plaintiffs is under NEPA. There is currently a split in the circuits regarding the test for standing under NEPA. Building upon precedent in the Ninth and Tenth Circuits, this Article proposes a liberal approach to standing in NEPA cases could allow at least some plaintiffs to raise global warming issues under the statute. Under the CAA, no decision has yet directly addressed whether plaintiffs have standing to raise climate change issues. In deciding whether a plaintiff has standing under the CAA to sue concerning global warming, a crucial issue is whether the EPA has the authority to regulate GHGs under the CAA. During the Clinton Administration, two different EPA general counsels concluded EPA had some authority to regulate Carbon dioxide under the CAA even if the United States did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol. In 2003, however, the Bush Administration EPA concluded the Agency has no authority to regulate carbon dioxide or other GHGs. Several states are challenging the EPA's refusal to regulate GHGs. If this suit is successful, there would be a stronger basis for concluding there is standing in climate change cases. Even if it does not have direct authority to regulate carbon dioxide, the EPA may have indirect authority under CAA's new source review (NSR) process for approving permits for power plants to consider unregulated pollutants, i.e., carbon dioxide, in determining what is the best available control technology. This article will argue at least some plaintiffs would have standing to argue the EPA must consider technology would reduce unregulated pollutants such as CO2." @default.
• W3124054460 created "2021-02-01" @default.
• W3124054460 creator A5012958341 @default.
• W3124054460 date "2005-01-01" @default.
• W3124054460 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W3124054460 title "Standing and Global Warming: Is Injury to All Injury to None?" @default.
• W3124054460 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W3124054460 type Work @default.
• W3124054460 sameAs 3124054460 @default.
• W3124054460 citedByCount "9" @default.
• W3124054460 countsByYear W31240544602012 @default.
• W3124054460 countsByYear W31240544602017 @default.
• W3124054460 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3124054460 hasAuthorship W3124054460A5012958341 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C108170787 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C115343472 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C132651083 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C178790620 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C18903297 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C2777404476 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C2778137410 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C36289849 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C559116025 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C97460637 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConcept C98184364 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C108170787 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C115343472 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C126322002 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C132651083 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C138885662 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C144024400 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C144133560 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C17744445 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C178790620 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C185592680 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C18903297 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C199539241 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C2777404476 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C2778137410 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C2778272461 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C36289849 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C41895202 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C559116025 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C71924100 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C86803240 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C97460637 @default.
• W3124054460 hasConceptScore W3124054460C98184364 @default.
• W3124054460 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W3124054460 hasLocation W31240544601 @default.
• W3124054460 hasOpenAccess W3124054460 @default.
• W3124054460 hasPrimaryLocation W31240544601 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W1496738257 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W1510781892 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W1555539297 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W1565400727 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W1591517326 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W1604340427 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W1641875573 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W21210502 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W221693478 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W2252648492 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W2279150370 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W233463043 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W3121953516 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W3124722719 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W3125521425 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W3138341387 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W317161102 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W3209839644 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W346983969 @default.
• W3124054460 hasRelatedWork W2603508500 @default.
• W3124054460 hasVolume "35" @default.
• W3124054460 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3124054460 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3124054460 magId "3124054460" @default.
• W3124054460 workType "article" @default.