Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Подписаться 54 тыс.

Просмотров 28 тыс.

50% 1

Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► www.quimbee.co...
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency | 549 U.S. 497 (2007)
Originally passed by Congress in 1963, the Clean Air Act requires the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate the emission of pollutants that "endanger public health and welfare." The act also authorized state and local governments to enforce regulations with oversight by the EPA.
In 1999, a group of 19 private organizations petitioned the EPA asking it to regulate the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles. The EPA refused.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here www.quimbee.co...
The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► www.quimbee.co...
Have Questions about this Case?
Submit your questions and get answers from real attorney here: www.quimbee.co...
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our RU-vid Channel ► www.youtube.co...
Quimbee Case Brief App ► www.quimbee.co...
Facebook ► / quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► / quimbeedotcom
casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries

Опубликовано:

14 окт 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 18

@smashley5687 11 месяцев назад

I have a 3 page paper due on this case tomorrow and no matter how many times I reviewed the court documents I could NOT understand them! I'm not a law student, so this really helped. Thank you!

@gerryadams7075 4 года назад

Why does this video only cover the standing issue and not the, arguably more important, substantive issue?

@CloudBuster5 5 лет назад

This helped me out sooo much on homework. I could understand you better than the book

@asar5988 8 лет назад

Good job, it was helpful for my class!

@BevCampese 4 года назад

Very helpful. The judicial opinions are so difficult to understand. This video cleared up all confusion.

@huntermatthews3407 7 лет назад

Really helped me understand this case, thank you!

@gtcp85 3 года назад

Can you address how this case relates to the recent Texas Supreme Court case? Why did they lack standing whereas in this case standing was established?

@irenesung8474 7 лет назад

This is really helpful for me, thank you!

@BhSyria 6 лет назад

Hi, good job, plz can you give a brief about this case ? I am writing a research about that , thank you

@fernandovargas7562 3 года назад

Cool info ... Thank you...

@-rapha 5 лет назад

Informative, thankful for these videos! Q: Is this the most high profile case re: climate change, brought before SCOTUS? I'm reading up on 'Juliana v. US' and researching SCOTUS precedent in regards to environmental protections.I understand the bulk of climate enforcement has been mostly delegated to states but there are a few instances where higher courts have opined. Furthermore, the peculiar 'Environmental Commerce Clause' in Article I, Section 8 Clause 3-to restrict air and water pollution & protect endangered species, has been used to argue that Americans might have a Constitutional right to a clean and healthy environment. There are so many dots to connect, would love to hear your thoughts... thanks!

@6ch6ris6 6 лет назад

i just don't understand why the EPA didn't just regulate the emission. i mean it's name clearly says that this is their task. right? RIGHT??? i don't get it...

@NathansHVAC 6 лет назад

6ch6ris6 co2 is required for life on earth to exist. Also, sea levels were already rising since the last ice age at 1mm per year. Now the rate is 2mm per year. Coastal land will disappear even if man never existed.

@tylerjones7425 6 лет назад

For the same reason they used the excuse that all states are injured so no state is injured in an attempt to avoid the problem. Green house gasses are a by product of fossil fuels which are still the status quo for energy in the automobile industry. I do believe the bigger they are the harder they fall, however I doubt big oil will be falling any time soon, and definitely not w/o a fight.

@abrahameminem1990 6 лет назад

Hi greetings from Macquarie Uni!!

@PurpleT3a 6 лет назад

My grades thank you.

@nancym5341 2 года назад

And now the EPA has given the RIGHTS TO, get this, Vanguard now owns the freakin air you breathe. Yup, y’all had to have them fancy wrist computers and now they have a lot of data on how much folks breathe. Good going! Start thinking ahead! Everything is transactional! Money! Google Black Rock