Environmental Litigation Standing After Massachusetts v. EPA: Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA
As a consequence of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, reduced standing requirements have enabled litigators to pursue environmental claims and compel U.S. Federal agencies to enforce existing statutes. Center for Biological Diversity...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Text |
Language: | unknown |
Published: |
Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law
2009
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/peel_alumni/85 https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/context/peel_alumni/article/1091/viewcontent/viewcontent.cgi |
id |
ftamericuniwashl:oai:digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu:peel_alumni-1091 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
ftamericuniwashl:oai:digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu:peel_alumni-1091 2023-11-12T04:23:53+01:00 Environmental Litigation Standing After Massachusetts v. EPA: Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA Hoisado, Andy 2009-10-01T07:00:00Z application/pdf https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/peel_alumni/85 https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/context/peel_alumni/article/1091/viewcontent/viewcontent.cgi unknown Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/peel_alumni/85 https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/context/peel_alumni/article/1091/viewcontent/viewcontent.cgi PEEL Alumni Scholarship environmental law water law text 2009 ftamericuniwashl 2023-10-22T16:33:03Z As a consequence of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, reduced standing requirements have enabled litigators to pursue environmental claims and compel U.S. Federal agencies to enforce existing statutes. Center for Biological Diversity v. Environmental Protection Agency is predicated upon these reduced standing requirements. On May 14, 2009, the Center for Biological Diversity (“CBD”) filed a complaint in the Western District of Washington against the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) based on EPA’s failure to list and regulate damage caused to Washington’s coastal waters by ocean acidification. In the suit, the CBD alleged that the EPA’s approval of Washington’s list of impaired waters, which only included inland waters and did not include the adversely affected coastal ocean areas, harmed the right of its members to enjoy the marine animals in the area. As a result of the EPA’s action, CBD also claimed that its members suffered procedural and informational injury. Text Ocean acidification Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law |
op_collection_id |
ftamericuniwashl |
language |
unknown |
topic |
environmental law water law |
spellingShingle |
environmental law water law Hoisado, Andy Environmental Litigation Standing After Massachusetts v. EPA: Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA |
topic_facet |
environmental law water law |
description |
As a consequence of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, reduced standing requirements have enabled litigators to pursue environmental claims and compel U.S. Federal agencies to enforce existing statutes. Center for Biological Diversity v. Environmental Protection Agency is predicated upon these reduced standing requirements. On May 14, 2009, the Center for Biological Diversity (“CBD”) filed a complaint in the Western District of Washington against the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) based on EPA’s failure to list and regulate damage caused to Washington’s coastal waters by ocean acidification. In the suit, the CBD alleged that the EPA’s approval of Washington’s list of impaired waters, which only included inland waters and did not include the adversely affected coastal ocean areas, harmed the right of its members to enjoy the marine animals in the area. As a result of the EPA’s action, CBD also claimed that its members suffered procedural and informational injury. |
format |
Text |
author |
Hoisado, Andy |
author_facet |
Hoisado, Andy |
author_sort |
Hoisado, Andy |
title |
Environmental Litigation Standing After Massachusetts v. EPA: Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA |
title_short |
Environmental Litigation Standing After Massachusetts v. EPA: Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA |
title_full |
Environmental Litigation Standing After Massachusetts v. EPA: Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA |
title_fullStr |
Environmental Litigation Standing After Massachusetts v. EPA: Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA |
title_full_unstemmed |
Environmental Litigation Standing After Massachusetts v. EPA: Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA |
title_sort |
environmental litigation standing after massachusetts v. epa: center for biological diversity v. epa |
publisher |
Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law |
publishDate |
2009 |
url |
https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/peel_alumni/85 https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/context/peel_alumni/article/1091/viewcontent/viewcontent.cgi |
genre |
Ocean acidification |
genre_facet |
Ocean acidification |
op_source |
PEEL Alumni Scholarship |
op_relation |
https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/peel_alumni/85 https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/context/peel_alumni/article/1091/viewcontent/viewcontent.cgi |
_version_ |
1782338512503177216 |