Podcast - Diamond Alternative Energy, LLC v. EPA: The Intersection of Constitutional and Environmental Law
SCOTUS Clean Air Act Cases: What’s New?
Rewriting the Rules: The Supreme Court's Landmark Decision on Clean Water Act Permits
On-Demand Webinar | Regulatory Uncertainty and Linear Infrastructure Projects: Where Are We and What’s Ahead?
PFAS: Increasing Regulations and Managing Legal Liability
On-Demand Webinar | Linear Infrastructure Redux: Adapting Your Projects to Meet the New Regulatory Climate
The Current and Future Landscapes of EPA Criminal and Civil Enforcement
On-Demand Webinar | The New NEPA Regulations: A Practical Guide to What You Need to Know
One-on-One with David Fotouhi, Acting General Counsel at the EPA
Volatile Times in Vapor Intrusion Regulation: A Legal and Technical Update
[WEBINAR] Fairly (or Unfairly?) Traceable: Are Discharges Through Groundwater Subject to the Clean Water Act?
[WEBINAR] Update on the California Environmental Quality Act: What’s New for 2018
In this episode of our "An Energized Exchange" podcast series, presented by the Energy & Natural Resources Industry Sector Group, attorneys Zach Pilchen, Brian Bunger and Rafe Petersen discuss the U.S. Supreme Court's...more
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA) 604 U.S. ____ (2025) significantly alters the regulatory landscape for NPDES permits under the Clean Water Act...more
In this episode of our "An Energized Exchange" podcast series, presented by the Energy & Natural Resources Industry Sector Group, attorneys Andy Kriha, Susan Lafferty and Zach Pilchen break down recent U.S. Supreme Court...more
In Environmental Protection Agency v. Calumet Shreveport Refining, L.L.C., the Supreme Court set out the test for determining the proper venue for judicial review of EPA actions under the Clean Air Act (CAA). Challenges to...more
The U.S. Supreme Court on June 20, 2025, issued a 7-2 decision in Diamond Alternative Energy, LLC v. EPA, clarifying when stakeholders have standing to challenge an agency action based on market effects rather than direct...more
On June 18, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two decisions that clarify a deceptively simple question under the Clean Air Act: Where should lawsuits challenging EPA actions be filed? The rulings – EPA v. Calumet Shreveport...more
On June 18th, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two rulings determining where challenges to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) actions under the Clean Air Act must be filed. The Court held challenges to EPA actions that are...more
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a pair of decisions in EPA v. Calumet Shreveport Refining and Oklahoma v. EPA on June 18, 2025, resolving two related circuit splits regarding proper venue for challenging certain U.S....more
US Supreme Court Clean Air Act (CAA) decisions often result in big-picture changes to administrative law. Two CAA decisions this term deal with CAA’s venue-related provisions which specify where cases challenging US...more
Today, the Supreme Court interpreted the Clean Air Act’s venue framework for judicial review of EPA actions. Under 42 U. S. C. §7607(b)(1), “nationally applicable” EPA actions can be challenged only in the D. C. Circuit,...more
On March 4, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in the case City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, in which it held that “end-result” requirements routinely imposed by the U.S....more
In this episode of Digging Into Land Use Law, Byron Gee, Willis Hon and Sara Johnson review in detail the recent Supreme Court opinion in City and County of San Francisco vs. EPA and its implications for Clean Water Act...more
The White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) circulated a draft template, dated April 8, 2025, to assist federal agencies in updating their procedures for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)....more
On March 4, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5-4 opinion in City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, holding that “end-result” requirements routinely imposed by the EPA in NPDES permits issued...more
In a much-anticipated decision, the U.S. Supreme Court significantly narrowed the EPA's authority under the Clean Water Act (CWA) to impose so-called "end-result" requirements in NPDES permits. These "end-result" requirements...more
On Monday morning, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Juliana v. United States. The cert. denial leaves in place the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision that ordered the case dismissed for lack of standing. At least for...more
In City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, 604 U.S. ___, 145 S. Ct. 704 (2025), in a 5-4 decision issued on March 4, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down two provisions in San...more
On March 12, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army took steps to address lingering questions about the meaning and implementation of “waters of the United States” (WOTUS)...more
When the Supreme Court issued its decision in City & County of San Francisco v. EPA on March 4, 2025, it may have saved San Francisco $10 billion dollars in penalties sought by the United States Environmental Protection...more
The U.S. Supreme Court last week, in a 5-4 decision, held that discharge permit “end-result” requirements—those that make a permittee responsible for the quality of the receiving water into which the permittee discharges—are...more
In the US Supreme Court’s first post-Chevron decision involving the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the Supreme Court found against EPA, invalidating ‘end result’ NPDES permit requirements....more
In a 5-4 ruling on March 4, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lacks authority to impose Clean Water Act (CWA) conditions in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)...more
On March 3, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court decided City and County of San Francisco, California v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 23-753, holding that Section 1311(b)(1)(A) of the Clean Water Act does not authorize the...more
Earlier this month, in Lewis v. United States the 5th Circuit issued a decision interpreting the Supreme Court’s decision in Sackett v. EPA. The 5th Circuit decision is a model of clarity and demonstrates what I’ll call the...more
When EPA published its most recent rule specifying the role of States and Tribes in the Federal permitting of discharges into Waters of the United States, I predicted it was only a matter of time before we'd see another...more