Quick Guide to Administrative Hearings
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prominent Journalist, David Dayen, Describes his Reporting on the Efforts of Trump 2.0 to Curb CFPB
Notorious: The RBG Podcast - Episode 11: Three Cheers for Beer: A Discussion of Craig v. Boren
The M&A Word of the Day® from the Book of Jargon® – Global Mergers & Acquisitions Is Revlon Doctrine
Konczal: Dodd-Frank Reforms Get Roughed Up in Court
The United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado, on May 19, 2025, clarifying that the scope of judicial review of federal agency environmental...more
The US Supreme Court in EPA v. Calumet Shreveport clarified where challenges to certain US Environmental Protection Agency actions under the Clean Air Act must be filed. The Court split the difference between competing...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
Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. (B&C®) is pleased to present “Loper Bright: Has the Demise of Chevron Deference Mattered?,” a complimentary webinar reviewing changes to Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) determinations in light of...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
With six more decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court decided no fewer than 11 cases in two business days last week, following 12 others over the previous two weeks. In other words, summer vacation is upon us, as the Court’s...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
Every law student learns that the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) outlines the default rules for how federal agencies propose and finalize regulations and how courts review them. But for many significant actions under the...more
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in four cases: Oklahoma v. Environmental Protection Agency; Pacificorp v. Environmental Protection Agency, Nos. 23-1067, 23-1068: These consolidated cases...more
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to revisit one of its most significant rulings affecting administrative rules and regulations by granting cert in the matter Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. The court's decision...more
Last week, EPA released its proposed “Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification Improvement Rule”. The proposed rule would make a number of significant changes to the rule promulgated by EPA in 2020....more
EPA has now formally restored its waiver under § 209(b) of the Clean Air Act that allows California’s greenhouse gas emissions standards and Zero Emission Vehicle mandate, notwithstanding the preemption of state vehicle...more
The Supreme Court issued a decision last week regarding which federal courts have jurisdiction to hear challenges to the 2015 Waters of the U.S. Rule....more
In addition to a January 20th Presidential Memorandum freezing all, not yet enacted, rules and sending them back to the agencies and Office of Management and Budget for reconsideration, and the utilization of the...more
The United States Supreme Court has handed regulated parties their second win in four years concerning when they can take EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to court over wetlands permitting issues. In 2012, the...more
On May 31, 2016, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., Inc. holding that approved judicial determinations as to the presence of wetlands issued by the...more
The United States Supreme Court handed landowners and developers a win this month in a unanimous decision allowing appeals to federal courts of Army Corps of Engineers determinations that a body of water or wetland is subject...more
On May 31, 2016, in United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., the US Supreme Court unanimously held that a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) approved jurisdictional determination (JD) is a final agency action...more
Environmental and Policy Focus - U.S. Supreme Court allows pre-permit challenges to approved jurisdictional determinations - Allen Matkins - May 31 - In a major new legal development for the Clean Water Act's...more
In a rebuke to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”), the United States Supreme Court unanimously held on May 31, 2016, in Corps v. Hawkes that jurisdictional determinations (“JDs”) under the Clean Water Act are...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Supreme Court decided that Army Corps’ jurisdictional determinations are judicially reviewable. This decision leaves open the question of whether other types of administrative decisions are immediately...more
Introduction - On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision that continues a trend of judicial skepticism toward federal agency efforts to avoid judicial review of agency permitting and related...more
Decision allows landowners to challenge in court a US Army Corps of Engineers’ determination that a property is subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act....more
Earlier this week, the US Supreme Court unanimously concluded that wetland determinations by the US Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) under the Clean Water Act constitute final agency action, meaning that landowners can...more
United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., Inc. (5/31/16, No. 15-290) - In a widely anticipated decision in the wake of the Sackette v. EPA (132 S.Ct. 1367 (2012) decision, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that...more