Cost-Benefit Analysis at the Supreme Court: Cooling Water v. Fish
نویسنده
چکیده
This is the story of a recent U.S. Supreme Court case on the use of cost-benefit analysis at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for a regulation issued under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The case is Entergy Corp. v. Riverkeeper, Inc., et al. The case was not about the quality of the cost-benefit analysis, nor the fact that EPA conducted one, but whether EPA had CWA authority to base regulatory decisions on cost-benefit. I close with thoughts about an alternative Chevron legal test that acknowledges the state of ecosystem valuation.
منابع مشابه
Fear and Darkness: Anti-abortion Terrorism and the United States Supreme Court
Title of Thesis: FEAR AND DARKNESS: ANTI-ABORTION TERRORISM AND THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT Brad Bartholomew, Master of Arts Thesis Directed by: Professor Ray Paternoster Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice Relative deprivation theory (Davies, 1962) suggests that acts of anti-abortion terrorism result from the general widening of the gap between the individual’s goals and expecta...
متن کاملGoldfarb and Mathews: legal challenges to the dependency test for spouse's benefits.
Changes in the eligibility criteria for a survivor's benefit under the Social Security program resulted from a 1977 Supreme Court decision in the case of Califano v. Goldfarb. The Court ruled that legislation that required only men to prove past financial dependence on a deceased spouse in order to establish eligibility to a survivor's benefit violated equal protection guarantees in the Constit...
متن کاملWhole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt (2016)
In the 2016 case Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, the US Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the Texas requirements that abortion [2] providers have admitting privileges at local hospitals and that abortion [2] facilities meet ambulatory surgical center standards. Whole Woman?s Health represented abortion [2] care providers in Texas and brought the case against the commissioner for the Tex...
متن کاملCognitive Mapping of the Human Capital of the Auditors of Supreme Audit Court
The present study was conducted with the aim of analyzing the components of human capital and discovering the relationships between them for the auditors of the Supreme Audit Court. Thus, after identifying the dimensions of human capital at the individual level, the components of human capital for the auditors of the Supreme Audit Court were extracted using content analysis of semi-structured i...
متن کاملWhy the Third Circuit Pro-Cooperative Federalism Preemption Holding in Bell Should Ultimately Be Adopted by the Supreme Court
In Bell v. Cheswick Generating Station, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, holding that state common law tort actions were not preempted by the federal Clean Air Act (“CAA”). The Third Circuit found that the savings clause of the CAA was nearly identical to that of the Clean Water Act (“CWA”), ...
متن کامل