West Virginia vs. EPA Part II: U.S. Supreme Court Applies the Major Questions Doctrine to limit EPA Regulatory Authority
West Virginia vs. EPA: An Environmental Regulations Case with Broad Implications for Agency Power
Jones Day Talks: Developments in Germany's Wind Power Regulations
On June 11, 2025, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") announced a proposed rule to repeal key amendments to the 2024 Mercury and Air Toxics Standards ("MATS") for coal- and oil-fired electric utility steam...more
The Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") has announced a new proposed rule that would strengthen the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ("NESHAP") for Coal- and Oil- Fired Electric Utility Steam...more
United States Senator Tom Carper (D-Del.) sent a December 13th letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs: . . . expressing grave concerns regarding the...more
Outlined in an Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") proposal published on August 31, 2018, the Affordable Clean Energy ("ACE") rule would replace the Obama Administration's Clean Power Plan ("CPP"). A 60-day public comment...more
U.S. Army Corps Stands by Permit for Dakota Access Oil Pipeline - "The U.S. Army Corps said that a permit it granted for the Dakota Access Pipeline last year was environmentally sound, handing a setback to tribal and green...more
Environmental and Policy Focus - Supreme Court rejects new challenge to EPA’s air pollution rule - The Hill - Jun 13 - The Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider a third request from a group of states to...more
In this edition of Seyfarth Shaw’s Energy Insights Newsletter our Energy and Clean Technologies team covers important developments in Q2 2015 for the energy industry including court protection for companies using hydraulic...more
Environmental and Policy Focus - BP pays record $18.7 billion to settle claims in Gulf oil spill Bloomberg - Jul 2: BP Plc reached a record $18.7 billion agreement to settle all federal and state claims from the 2010...more
Today the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) improperly refused to consider costs when it decided to regulate mercury and other hazardous emissions. The EPA regulated power plant...more
Wednesday the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Michigan v. EPA, a Clean Air Act case involving hazardous air pollutant regulations, with implications for fossil fuel-fired power plant owners and operators in...more
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments yesterday on whether the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) unreasonably decided not to consider the cost of regulation when the EPA determined it was “appropriate and necessary” to...more
The D.C. Circuit, by majority decision, upheld MATS, which requires coal- and oil-fired power plants to reduce emissions of mercury, arsenic, chromium, and other air pollutants. When the EPA adopted MATS in 2011, it did not...more