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
Compliance into the Weeds: More Compliance Challenges in the Trump Era
Environmental and Sustainability Regulations & the New Administration
No Password Required: USF Cybercrime Professor, Former Federal Agent, and Vintage Computer Archivist
Georgia on My Mind: On the Frontlines of Federal Rulemaking With AG Carr — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Small Refinery Exemption Litigation Update
[Podcast] Keith Matthews and Chris Wozniak: Talking Ag Biotech Episode 5
[Podcast] Keith Matthews and Chris Wozniak: Talking Ag Biotech Episode 4
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Look at the Current Challenge to Judicial Deference to Federal Agencies and What it Means for the Consumer Financial Services Industry, With Special Guest, Craig Green, Professor, Temple University
What to Expect in Chemicals Policy and Regulation and on Capitol Hill in 2023
H2-OWOW! – A Reflective Conversation with John Goodin, Former Director of EPA’s Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds – Reflections on Water Podcast
Reflections on Sackett - Reflections on Water Podcast
PFAS in Focus: Wastewater Utility Perspectives From Jay Hoskins, Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District - Reflections on Water Podcast
[Podcast] Keith Matthews and Chris Wozniak: Talking Ag Biotech
Environmental Agencies, Superfund Cleanups, and Managing Enforcement Actions
West Virginia vs. EPA Part II: U.S. Supreme Court Applies the Major Questions Doctrine to limit EPA Regulatory Authority
#WorkforceWednesday: Employers Respond to Dobbs, Implications of the Supreme Court's EPA Ruling, and Pay Increases for CA Health Care Workers - Employment Law This Week®
PFAS Regulatory Update: EPA Issues Updated Drinking Water Health Advisories
On July 29th, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by environmental groups for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act resulting from the alleged illegal filling of wetlands on Georgia’s coast....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 its recent decision in Waterkeeper Alliance v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 23-636 (9th Cir. June 18, 2025), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) failed to...more
On March 4, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, holding that EPA does not have the authority to issue “end-result” requirements in National...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
More than 50 years ago, the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA or Act) was enacted by Congress to protect the quality of the Nation’s waters. The scope of that protection has been evolving ever since. Until relatively recently, the...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 March 4, the City and County of San Francisco and a Beveridge & Diamond (B&D) team led by Principal Drew Silton (Washington, DC), secured a significant victory in the U.S. Supreme Court in City and County of San Francisco...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
The US Supreme Court held in City and County of San Francisco v. EPA that the US Environmental Protection Agency lacks authority under the Clean Water Act to include “end-result” limitations in National Pollutant Discharge...more
On March 4, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in City & County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency and clarified the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's ("EPA") and state...more
On March 4, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that prohibits the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA” or “the Agency”) from setting qualitative limits based on the condition of the “receiving waters” that...more
When it rains too much in San Francisco, the city's wastewater treatment plant can get overloaded. An overloaded wastewater treatment plant means that a city-operated, EPA-permitted point source in the Pacific Ocean could...more
On March 4, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued its ruling in City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, limiting the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s permitting authority under...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
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the City and County of San Francisco in a case against the US Environmental Protection Agency involving the scope of the Clean Water Act. See City & Cty. of San Francisco v. Environmental...more
Only a few readers of SCOTUS Today are lawyers who are professionally occupied with environmental matters. However, almost all of my readers are constantly occupied with administrative law matters, governed in the...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
Just in time to celebrate our Nation’s birthday, the United States Supreme Court brought out its hammer to again chip away at the administrative state in two landmark decisions: Loper Bright Enterprises et al. v. Raimondo,...more
November 26, 2019, Judge William Young ruled that discharges to groundwater are not subject to Clean Water Act jurisdiction, even if they ultimately reach surface waters that are unambiguously waters of the United States. He...more
Last week, EPA proposed revisions to its regulations governing the issuance of water quality certifications under § 401 of the Clean Water Act. The regulations are long-overdue and, notwithstanding the source, some of the...more
After decades of insisting otherwise and before the U.S. Supreme Court has had a chance to rule on the issue, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) took steps to limit its interpretation of the Clean Water Act’s...more
In a decision on Tuesday that must have sent shivers down the spine of every coal company executive, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals restored EPA’s authority to withdraw the specification of streams for the disposal of...more