Articles tagged with "environmental-law"
Sierra Club & Partners Challenge Trump Administration’s Illegal Efforts to Block the Retirement of Indiana Coal Plants - CleanTechnica
The Sierra Club, along with partners including the Environmental Law and Policy Center (ELPC), Earthjustice, Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana, Just Transition Northwest Indiana, and the Hoosier Environmental Council, has filed a legal challenge against the Trump administration’s Department of Energy (DOE) “emergency” orders. These orders, issued in December 2020, forced the continued operation of two Indiana coal-fired power plants—the R.M. Schahfer plant and one unit at the F.B. Culley generating station—beyond their planned retirement dates. The coalition argues that these orders are illegal, override decisions made by power companies, grid operators, and state regulators, and impose unnecessary costs on Indiana residents and neighboring states by requiring repairs and continued operation of uneconomic, polluting coal plants. The coalition’s attorneys and leaders emphasize that the DOE’s actions lack legal justification and harm consumers by increasing electricity prices, which are already among the highest in Indiana. They contend that the federal government has no authority
energycoal-powerpower-plantsenergy-policyenvironmental-lawenergy-costsgrid-stabilityEarthjustice & Sierra Club Blast Trump Administration Order to Keep Washington’s Last Coal Plant Open - CleanTechnica
The article reports on the opposition from Earthjustice and the Sierra Club to a Department of Energy (DOE) order under the Trump administration that forces the TransAlta coal plant in Centralia, Washington—the state’s last coal-fired power plant—to remain operational. Both environmental groups argue that the DOE’s order is unlawful and contradicts the interests of Washington residents, who favor cleaner, more affordable, and reliable energy sources. They contend that the administration is misusing Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act, which is intended for short-term emergency power needs, to prolong the operation of an outdated and polluting coal plant, thereby undermining planned energy transitions and increasing costs for consumers. The legal challenge, supported by Earthjustice on behalf of several environmental organizations and the State of Washington, asserts that the Trump administration’s intervention disrupts regional energy planning and prioritizes coal despite its inefficiency and environmental harm. The Sierra Club emphasizes that the administration’s interference poses a greater risk to energy reliability in the Northwest than
energycoal-powerclean-energyenergy-policyenvironmental-lawpower-plantsenergy-transitionSierra Club Sues Trump Administration for Failing Americans’ Public Health from Gas Plant Pollution - CleanTechnica
The Sierra Club, along with environmental allies, has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The suit challenges the EPA’s inadequate Clean Air Act standards for nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from gas-fired power plants, which contribute to smog and cause serious public health issues such as asthma, cardiovascular problems, hospital visits, missed school and work days, and premature death. The EPA had failed to update NOx pollution limits for 20 years until pressured by environmental groups in 2022, but the Trump-era final rule not only allowed increased NOx pollution from some plants but also completely omitted any analysis of the rule’s impact on public health—a central focus of the Clean Air Act. The Trump administration’s EPA has further announced it will broadly apply this policy of ignoring public health impacts in future Clean Air Act standards, effectively disregarding the benefits of lives saved and illnesses prevented due to reduced air
energyclean-energyair-pollutiongas-fired-power-plantsEPA-regulationsenvironmental-lawpublic-healthSierra Club, Partners Sue EPA Over Illegal Repeal of Climate Protections - CleanTechnica
A coalition of health and environmental organizations, including the Sierra Club, American Public Health Association, American Lung Association, and others, has filed a lawsuit against the EPA in the D.C. Circuit Court. The suit challenges the Trump administration’s repeal of the 2009 endangerment finding, which recognized climate pollution as a threat to public health and welfare and formed the basis for vehicle emissions standards aimed at reducing carbon pollution. The repeal also eliminated clean vehicle standards that were projected to deliver the largest reduction in U.S. carbon emissions, save lives, and reduce fuel costs for Americans. The plaintiffs argue that the EPA’s rollback is unlawful and contradicts the Supreme Court’s 2007 Massachusetts v. EPA decision, which affirmed greenhouse gases as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act and mandated EPA to regulate them based on scientific evidence. The lawsuit names EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and the EPA as defendants, emphasizing the agency’s legal obligation under the Clean Air Act to regulate pollutants that endanger public health.
energyclimate-changeEPA-regulationsvehicle-emissionsclean-air-actcarbon-pollutionenvironmental-lawSierra Club, Partners Sue EPA Over Illegal Repeal of Climate Protections - CleanTechnica
A coalition of health and environmental organizations, including the Sierra Club, American Public Health Association, American Lung Association, and others, has filed a lawsuit against the EPA in the D.C. Circuit Court. The suit challenges the Trump administration’s repeal of the 2009 EPA endangerment finding, which recognized climate pollution as a threat to public health and welfare and underpinned vehicle emissions standards aimed at reducing carbon pollution. The repeal also eliminated clean vehicle standards that were projected to deliver the largest reduction in U.S. carbon emissions, save lives, and reduce fuel costs for Americans. The lawsuit argues that the EPA’s rollback is unlawful and contradicts the Supreme Court’s 2007 Massachusetts v. EPA decision, which affirmed greenhouse gases as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. The plaintiffs contend that the Trump EPA’s actions will increase gas prices, harm the economy, and jeopardize public health by removing critical protections against climate pollution. Sierra Club’s Environmental Law Program Director Joanne Spalding emphasized that the
energyclimate-changeEPAvehicle-emissionsclean-air-standardscarbon-pollutionenvironmental-lawUS Oil Industry Busted For History-Making Antitrust Conspiracy
The article discusses a landmark federal antitrust lawsuit filed by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel against major oil companies—including BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell—and the American Petroleum Institute. Unlike previous climate-related lawsuits that focused on fraud, deception, and consumer harm, this case centers on a nearly 50-year conspiracy to restrain trade and engage in anti-competitive practices under the Sherman Antitrust Act, Clayton Antitrust Act, and Michigan Antitrust Reform Act. The lawsuit alleges that these defendants collaborated to suppress renewable energy development, manipulate patents, mislead institutions, intimidate watchdogs, and coordinate efforts through trade associations to divert investments away from clean energy alternatives. This legal action emerges amid a broader context of climate litigation, where states like Minnesota have pursued oil companies for deceptive advertising and failure to warn about climate risks. The Michigan lawsuit marks a strategic shift by focusing on antitrust violations rather than solely climate impacts or consumer fraud. The case highlights a sophisticated and long-running industry effort to maintain fossil fuel dominance
energyoil-industryantitrustclimate-litigationfossil-fuelsenvironmental-lawenergy-regulationA Year of Oversight & Accountability: Sierra Club FOIAs Have Uncovered Oil & Gas Handouts, Canceled Grants, Opposition to Whitewashing of History, & More - CleanTechnica
The Sierra Club’s Environmental Law Program has spent the first year of Donald Trump’s second term aggressively using Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to expose the Trump Administration’s close ties to the fossil fuel industry and its impact on environmental policy. Their efforts revealed that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) granted numerous exemptions to coal, steel, and chemical industries from Clean Air Act pollution controls. Additionally, the Department of the Interior cut thousands of critical jobs, including park rangers and science technicians, while also attempting to rewrite American history in national parks. The EPA also canceled grants aimed at helping lower-income communities cope with climate and environmental risks. In response to the administration’s frequent failure to comply with FOIA requests, the Sierra Club filed multiple lawsuits against various agencies, including the Department of the Interior, the Office of Management and Budget, and others, seeking records on funding freezes, external communications, and political appointees’ activities. These legal actions have resulted in the release of hundreds of emails,
energyfossil-fuelsenvironmental-regulationClean-Air-ActSierra-Clubclimate-policyenvironmental-lawEnvironmental & Community Orgs File Lawsuit to Stop Trump Exemptions from Air Pollution Rules for Steel Industry Coke Ovens - CleanTechnica
Community, health, and environmental organizations, including NRDC, Earthjustice, and the Southern Environmental Law Center, have filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to challenge the Trump administration’s exemption allowing steel industry coke ovens to bypass critical air pollution controls. The administration granted a two-year nationwide exemption for all 11 coke oven facilities in November 2025, claiming that required emissions-control technologies were not yet commercially viable. However, the EPA had recently found these updated pollution standards posed no significant immediate compliance challenges. Critics argue this exemption endangers public health by permitting continued toxic emissions of carcinogens and neurotoxic pollutants, particularly harming communities near facilities like ABC Coke in Alabama. The 2024 EPA coke oven rule introduced stricter emissions limits, mandatory fenceline air monitoring, and tighter controls on leaks from coke oven components, with compliance deadlines set between mid-2025 and early 2026. Advocates emphasize that these regulations were the result of long-standing community
energypollution-controlsteel-industryenvironmental-lawair-qualityindustrial-emissionsEPA-regulationsSierra Club Notice of Intent to Sue Flags Agency Failures to Protect Arctic Polar Bears from Oil & Gas Activities - CleanTechnica
The Sierra Club, along with allied organizations represented by Trustees for Alaska, has filed a notice of intent to sue the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for violations of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The lawsuit challenges the agencies’ approval of expanded oil and gas exploration, drilling, and development in the Coastal Plain of the Arctic Refuge, a critical maternal denning habitat for the highly vulnerable Southern Beaufort Sea polar bear population. The Sierra Club contends that the FWS’s September 2025 biological opinion, which underpins the BLM’s leasing program, contains significant legal flaws and underestimates the detrimental impacts of these activities on polar bears and their habitat. The Coastal Plain is particularly important because it has a higher density of maternal denning sites than most other northern Alaska regions, and polar bear cubs under two months old are extremely vulnerable, unable to survive outside their dens. The Sierra Club’s Oil and Gas Campaign
energyoil-and-gasenvironmental-lawArctic-wildlifepolar-bearsendangered-specieshabitat-protectionCourt Sides with Sierra Club and Advocates to Strike Down EPA Clean Air Designation - CleanTechnica
A federal appeals court has ruled in favor of the Sierra Club and environmental advocates by striking down the EPA’s decision to redesignate the Detroit area from “nonattainment” to “attainment” under the Clean Air Act for ground-level ozone pollution. This legal victory, stemming from a 2023 lawsuit, prevents Michigan from avoiding stricter pollution controls and permitting requirements that are crucial for reducing ozone precursor emissions. The ruling comes amid rising asthma rates in Detroit, particularly affecting Black communities, and addresses longstanding air quality issues in the region. The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit found that the EPA acted unlawfully in allowing the redesignation, thereby reinstating stricter air quality standards and permitting rules for new pollution sources in the Detroit area. While the court upheld some EPA findings that let Michigan avoid other nonattainment requirements, the decision effectively closes a loophole that had made it easier for states to circumvent stricter pollution controls. Advocates emphasize that this ruling is a significant step toward improving
energyenvironmental-lawpollution-controlair-qualityClean-Air-ActEPA-regulationspublic-healthComments on Federal Judge Vacating Trump’s Unlawful Wind Energy Ban - CleanTechnica
The article discusses a recent federal court ruling that vacated former President Donald Trump’s executive order banning wind energy projects in the United States. Trump’s opposition to wind farms dates back to a 2006 lawsuit against a Scottish offshore wind project near his golf course, which he lost. As president, he aggressively blocked wind and solar energy initiatives through regulations favoring fossil fuels, hindering the growth of the renewable energy sector and costing the U.S. tens of thousands of jobs, particularly in offshore wind development. The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts found Trump’s wind energy ban unlawful, citing its arbitrary nature, lack of scientific basis, unclear purpose, and threat to U.S. climate goals and public health. Environmental groups and clean energy advocates hailed the decision as a significant victory for affordable, reliable, and clean energy. They emphasized that lifting the ban will help restore job growth in the wind sector, reduce electricity costs, and advance climate and health objectives. The ruling also clears the way
energyrenewable-energywind-powerclean-energyoffshore-windenergy-policyenvironmental-lawFederal Judge Lifts Key Part Of Trump's Offshore Wind Ban
A federal judge in the US District Court for Massachusetts has ruled that a significant portion of former President Donald Trump’s January 20 Offshore Wind Order is illegal and must be vacated. While the court upheld Trump’s authority to suspend new offshore wind lease issuances temporarily, it found that the suspension of ongoing offshore wind projects was arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law. Judge Patti B. Saris declared the order unlawful, emphasizing that the executive action constituted a final agency decision that failed to comply with legal standards. The ruling specifically targeted the order’s halt on projects already in progress, effectively reinstating their ability to move forward. The case involved multiple federal agencies, including the Department of the Interior and its subagencies, the Department of Commerce, the Environmental Protection Agency, and others, all named as defendants alongside Trump. Plaintiffs included offshore wind industry groups and a coalition of state attorneys general from 18 states and Washington, DC, signaling broad opposition to the ban. Industry representatives welcomed the
energyoffshore-windrenewable-energywind-powerUS-energy-policyenvironmental-lawclean-energyFederal Judge Dismisses Climate Lawsuit In Montana - CleanTechnica
A federal judge in Montana dismissed a climate lawsuit filed by a group of young plaintiffs represented by the public interest law firm Our Children’s Trust. The plaintiffs sought to block the enforcement of three executive orders promoting fossil fuel use, arguing these orders violated their constitutional rights to a clean and healthy environment. The case featured testimony from expert witnesses, including prominent environmental economists and former White House advisor John Podesta, who warned that the orders would exacerbate the climate crisis and harm public health and safety. US District Court Judge Dana Christensen expressed discomfort with the complex legal issues involved and questioned the practicality of granting an injunction that would require him to potentially oversee and block numerous fossil fuel–related policies across multiple agencies. He highlighted the challenge of enforcing such a broad injunction and indicated caution, noting the case would likely be appealed to higher courts. The plaintiffs aimed to restore the regulatory status quo as of January 19, before the executive orders were signed, but the judge remained skeptical about the feasibility and scope of such relief. The
energyclimate-changefossil-fuelsclean-energyenvironmental-lawclimate-litigationrenewable-energyClimate Activists Should Use Antitrust Laws Against Big Oil - CleanTechnica
The article discusses the legal challenges faced by climate activists in holding Big Oil companies accountable for their role in climate change. A notable lawsuit filed by Puerto Rico against major fossil fuel companies such as ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron, Shell, and ConocoPhillips accused them of misleading the public about climate change and delaying the transition to clean energy despite internal scientific knowledge of their products' harmful effects. However, this lawsuit was dismissed due to the statute of limitations, which typically allows only three years to file such claims, and Puerto Rico's suit was filed too late following Hurricane Maria in 2017. Despite this setback, the article highlights a new legal strategy proposed by Aaron Regunberg and Zephyr Teachout, who suggest using antitrust laws to challenge Big Oil. They argue that antitrust laws, which are designed to prevent collusion and protect market competition, could effectively address the fossil fuel industry's coordinated efforts to block renewable energy development and maintain market dominance. The article cites internal Exxon memos acknowledging the
energyfossil-fuelsclimate-changeclean-energy-transitionantitrust-lawsBig-Oilenvironmental-lawYoung Environmentalists Sue Over Executive Orders That Benefit Fossil Fuels - CleanTechnica
A group of young environmentalists, previously successful in suing the state of Montana for violating its constitutional guarantee of a safe and clean environment, have now joined forces with other youth activists to sue the federal government. They seek to block several presidential executive orders issued this year that promote fossil fuel production under the guise of a national energy emergency. The lawsuit, supported by the nonprofit legal organization Our Children’s Trust, argues that these executive orders are unlawful and violate the state-created danger doctrine, which prohibits government actions that harm citizens. The case, heard in a federal courtroom in Missoula, Montana, marks the first time a youth-led constitutional climate lawsuit has included live testimony at the federal level. Plaintiffs and expert witnesses, including prominent academics and former White House advisor John Podesta, testified that the executive orders will exacerbate the climate crisis and jeopardize the health and future of young people and their communities. The federal government, however, did not present any witnesses and has moved to dismiss the case, following a
energyfossil-fuelsclimate-changeenvironmental-lawrenewable-energyenergy-policylegal-activismMAGA Using Laws Passed By Democrats To Upend Renewable Energy Projects - CleanTechnica
The article from CleanTechnica discusses how laws and environmental protections originally established by progressive lawmakers to safeguard wildlife and public lands are now being exploited by MAGA-aligned officials and fossil fuel interests to hinder renewable energy projects. These laws, such as the Federal Land Policy and Management Act’s prohibition against “unnecessary or undue degradation,” are being weaponized to block wind and solar developments. Critics argue this is an abuse of environmental regulations, turning tools meant to protect nature into obstacles for clean energy expansion. A key example highlighted is the Interior Department’s recent capacity density order, which sets strict limits on how much energy can be generated per unit of land. This metric, focusing narrowly on energy density, is criticized for ignoring the broader environmental and economic benefits of renewables. Experts point out that renewable installations can be removed and land restored relatively quickly, unlike fossil fuel infrastructure that causes long-term contamination. The article suggests that this approach by the Department of the Interior effectively acts as a ban on renewable projects on federal lands
renewable-energysolar-powerwind-energyenergy-policyenvironmental-lawfossil-fuelssustainable-energyNot so fast: German court says Apple can’t call Watch carbon neutral
A German court has ruled that Apple cannot label its Watch Series 9 as carbon neutral, overturning the company’s earlier claim that the product’s entire lifecycle—from manufacturing to disposal—does not contribute to global warming. Although Apple calculates that each aluminum Apple Watch generates just over 8 kilograms of carbon emissions, it offsets these through carbon credits purchased from a reforestation project involving eucalyptus trees in Paraguay. The court’s decision was prompted by a lawsuit from the German environmental group Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH). The court focused on the nature and duration of the carbon offset project, noting that three-quarters of the eucalyptus plantation area is on leased land with leases expiring in 2029. This short timeframe undermines the credibility of Apple’s carbon-neutral claim because consumers would reasonably expect that carbon offsets should be secured well beyond 2050, aligning with the Paris Agreement’s goal to end carbon emissions in the latter half of the century. Without longer-term land security, the plantations could be cut
energycarbon-neutralitycarbon-emissionsApple-Watchenvironmental-lawcarbon-offsetsustainabilityOur Children's Trust Represents Young People In Wisconsin In Climate Suit - CleanTechnica
Our Children’s Trust, a public interest law firm known for representing young plaintiffs in climate-related legal cases, has partnered with Midwest Environmental Advocates to file a lawsuit on behalf of 15 young residents of Wisconsin. The suit challenges two state statutes that allegedly favor fossil fuel-powered thermal electricity generation and restrict the expansion of renewable energy within Wisconsin. The plaintiffs argue that these laws violate their constitutional rights by perpetuating greenhouse gas emissions, thereby contributing to climate change and threatening their health, safety, and future stability. The case was filed on August 22 against the Wisconsin Public Service Commission (PSC) and the state legislature. The contested laws prevent the PSC from considering the environmental and health impacts of air pollution when approving new fossil fuel power plants and prohibit the commission from mandating utilities to increase their use of carbon-free energy sources. This legal framework effectively supports continued fossil fuel use despite Wisconsin’s official commitment to achieve 100% carbon-free electricity by 2050. The lawsuit seeks to invalidate these statutes, arguing that
energyrenewable-energyclimate-changefossil-fuelsenvironmental-lawgreenhouse-gas-emissionsclean-energy-policyInternational Court Of Justice Rules Climate Change Is "Existential Threat" - CleanTechnica
The International Court of Justice (ICJ), a United Nations body, issued a landmark advisory opinion on July 23, 2025, declaring climate change an “existential threat” that demands urgent global action. The Court emphasized that states have a legal obligation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, honor international climate agreements, and protect vulnerable populations and ecosystems. ICJ President Yuji Iwasawa underscored that human activities are unequivocally responsible for emissions causing cross-border harm, and failure to act may constitute an internationally wrongful act. The Court also recognized a “clean, healthy and sustainable environment” as a human right, aligning with similar constitutional provisions in some states, such as Montana. While the ruling is advisory and not legally binding, it places a clear duty on countries to implement binding measures consistent with climate treaties, particularly urging industrialized nations to lead due to their historical emissions. The Court called for national climate plans to be “progressive” and ambitious enough to limit global warming to 1
energyclimate-changegreenhouse-gas-emissionsenvironmental-lawsustainabilityclean-environmentglobal-warmingCriminalize Fossil Fuel Disinformation, Says UN Rapporteur - CleanTechnica
The article discusses a significant report by Elisa Morgera, the UN special rapporteur on human rights and climate change, which calls for urgent and transformative action to phase out fossil fuels due to their severe, widespread, and intergenerational human rights impacts. Morgera frames the fossil fuel crisis as a fundamental right to life issue, emphasizing that continued reliance on oil, gas, and coal threatens the existence of humanity. The report asserts that wealthy fossil fuel-producing nations like the US, UK, Canada, and Australia have a legal obligation under international law to fully phase out fossil fuels by 2030 and to compensate affected communities. It also demands bans on fracking, oil sands, gas flaring, fossil fuel exploration, subsidies, investments, and misleading technological solutions that perpetuate fossil fuel dependency. A particularly radical aspect of the report is its call to criminalize fossil fuel disinformation, proposing prohibitions on fossil fuel companies lobbying or advertising to prevent the spread of misleading information that undermines climate action. Mor
energyfossil-fuelsclimate-changeenvironmental-lawhuman-rightsclean-energy-transitionsustainabilityLawfare! How Courts & State Legislatures Influence Climate Action - CleanTechnica
The article discusses the emerging legal battles between individuals, states, and fossil fuel companies over responsibility for climate change-related damages. A landmark case involves Misti Leon from Washington suing oil companies for the extreme heat that caused her mother’s death during Seattle’s record 108°F heatwave in 2021, which scientists attribute largely to human-caused climate change. Unlike previous lawsuits brought by political entities on behalf of citizens, Leon’s case is unprecedented in the U.S. as it targets harm to a single individual. Similar legal efforts, such as a group of senior women suing at the European Court of Human Rights over disproportionate heat-related deaths, have so far been unsuccessful, largely due to prolonged legal delays and tactics reminiscent of those used by Big Tobacco to stall accountability. The article also highlights how some states, like New York and Vermont, have enacted laws shifting climate adaptation costs from taxpayers to fossil fuel companies through Climate Change Adaptation Cost Recovery Programs. These laws aim to make polluters financially responsible for infrastructure
energyclimate-changefossil-fuelsenvironmental-lawglobal-warmingheat-domelitigation