Environmental Law Advisor

A federal court’s recent ruling shields members of a national trade association from Oregon’s Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program pending trial, raising constitutional questions that could affect similar programs in other states.

A recent Michigan federal court decision emphasizes the need to review the separateness of corporate entities so that operational issues associated with one entity do not result in potential exposure for others.

On February 12, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the elimination of EPA’s 2009 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Endangerment Finding and all subsequent federal GHG emission standards for vehicle model years 2012 and newer — a move that will dramatically limit federal government engagement on climate issues.

The popular perception that we are in a relaxed federal enforcement environment should not lull businesses into taking their foot off the gas on compliance activities.

Trump Administration efforts to quash state-driven climate action were recently dealt a setback when a Michigan federal court rejected a federal effort to quash state claims focused on the fossil fuel industry.

Last week, the White House began its interagency review of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) final rule to rescind its 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding and related vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) standards.

Over the past year, both the executive branch and the courts sought to pare back certain stringent aspects of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews. However, a decision issued in December 2025 illustrates that agencies cannot defer conducting NEPA-required reviews until after project approval.

Companies have long dreaded litigation filed by federal environmental regulators because such cases tended to last forever and posed financial and representational risk.

On October 30, the Illinois General Assembly passed the Clean and Reliable Grid Affordability Act (CRGA). CRGA makes significant updates to Illinois’ current statewide siting and zoning framework for renewable energy projects and creates a statewide standard for energy storage projects.

In the environmental space, there is perhaps no more closely watched issue than how the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines the Clean Water Act term, “waters of the United States.”

On October 30, the Illinois General Assembly passed the Clean and Reliable Grid Affordability Act (CRGA), an omnibus energy bill creating incentives for energy storage projects.

A recent European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decision on the obligations of European states to study carbon-intensive permitting decisions crystallizes how global climate commitments may be beginning to harden into justiciable standards in some jurisdictions.

On his first day in office, President Trump declared a national energy emergency and instructed federal agencies to use emergency procedures to facilitate domestic energy production. On October 29, the US Army Corps of Engineers issued its first Clean Water Act Section 404 permit under the president’s energy emergency declaration and its emergency procedures.

The US Supreme Court has declined to review the Fifth Circuit’s decision in St. James Parish v. Inclusive Louisiana, leaving intact a unanimous ruling that environmental justice (EJ) organizations have standing to pursue a civil rights challenge to St. James Parish’s land-use practices in Louisiana’s industrial corridor.

The first nine months of the Trump Administration have seen extensive use of Executive Orders (EOs) to “deregulate” and otherwise rollback Biden-era environmental policies.

A proposed settlement in a Pennsylvania case and a citizen suit letter in South Carolina signal that discharging plastic into rivers and streams may trigger liability under the Clean Water Act (CWA) and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Manufacturers who use plastics in their products or processes should evaluate if any plastic releases exceed their current permit conditions.

Industrial property transfers are drawing renewed interest from both domestic and foreign investors. These assets can be attractive, but US environmental law imposes strict, often joint and several, liabilities that can create significant risk for buyers.

This year, the environmental agenda has focused on “deregulation” to promote industrial competitiveness, as well as a sharpened focus on energy generation and transmission to support economic growth.

A South Carolina state trial court recently dismissed a climate tort case filed by the City of Charleston seeking to hold major energy companies liable for harms allegedly caused by climate change. This ended a case that had bounced between state and federal courts for much of the last decade.

On July 29, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a proposal to rescind its 2009 Endangerment Finding.

The climate debate has whipsawed in recent years. Businesses frequently have been caught in the middle, with stakeholders including government regulators, activist investors, consumers, non-governmental organizations, and community groups all pursuing different agendas.

The Trump Administration has proposed implementing a broad range of regulatory changes in order to promote the development of artificial intelligence (AI) in the United States.

Within this term, the US Supreme Court’s major environmental and administrative focus was on statutory text in its environmental and administrative decisions.

On July 8, the US Supreme Court allowed President Trump’s executive order (EO) permitting Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)-related planning efforts for the Trump Administration’s restructuring of the federal workforce to move forward.

The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” — budget reconciliation bill signed into law on July 4 — and a new Executive Order (EO) have clarified that solar and wind generation.