Documents

Amicus Curiae Brief — Loper Bright Enterprises, et al., Petitioners v. Gina Raimondo, Secretary of Commerce, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Jul 21, 2023

There is no reason to overrule that decision unless the Court believes that it was wrong to interpret “stationary source” for purposes of the nonattainment provisions of the Clean Air Act as meaning the … The proper interpretation of the Clean Air Act, insofar as it applies to climate change, provides a prime illustration.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Utility Water Water Act Group Group v. Riverkeeper, Inc. (Nos. 07-597, 07-588, 07-589)

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2009

Rec. 33,696 (1976) .................c cece eee 4, 6, 22 Clean Air Act, Section 109(b), 42 U.S.C. § i cssgucosnaccoes 15, 16 Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq. .........0....... 1 Section 101 … U..J. 1315, 1318-19 & n.25 (1974); Lisa Heinzerling, The Clean Air Act and the Constitution, 20 St.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, Petitioner v. Tesla Energy Operations, Inc., fka SolarCity Corporation

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Feb 19, 2018

Lung Ass’n, State of the Air 9 (2017), available at http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/ healthy-air/state-of-the-air/state-of-the-air-2017.pdf. … Id. at 41; see also National Ass’n for the Advancement of Colored People & Clean Air Task Force, Fumes Across the Fence-Line: The Health Impacts of Air Pollution from Oil and Gas Facilities 26 (2017),

Reply Brief — Maine v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

Supreme Court brief · Reply Brief · 1989

First, the Federal Respondents dispute the peti- tioners’ assertion that EPA has made the Clean Air Act’s interstate air pollution provisions effectively meaning- less, suggesting instead that those … The Government responds to the central legal asser- tion of the Petition — that EPA’s construction of the Clean Air Act leaves the Act’s interstate pollution control provi- sions virtually meaningless

Appendix — Jersey Central Power & Light Co. v. Board of Public Utilities

Supreme Court brief · Appendix · 1984

C. 14:1-1.1 and 14:1-1.2, the Board HEREBY WAIVES the five (5) day period for written comments on the proposed tariffs. … McGlynn, Esq., for Air Products Company, Intervenor (Stryker, Tams & Dill, Attorneys) William R.

Reply Brief — Bennett v. Spear

Supreme Court brief · Reply Brief · 1997

CU s vce cccccawcachewsscihamavis 12 STATUTES Administrative Procedure Act Pee POR a hbde Wea uceees eanekeeeeaubnceoseeelus | > es PND & Cewalveess eauetenes wousuasmuikt 11 Clean Air Act Se … Respondents’ attempted analogy to the citizen suit provision of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7604) relies on language found in the Clean Air Act which is not present in the Endangered Species Act.

Appendices — United Transportation Union v. Slater

Supreme Court brief · Appendices · 1999

The HSA has a goal of promoting “clean, safe, and sanitary” living conditions for railroad workers. 49 U.S.C. § 21106 (1). … reducing the noise levels even further, specifically installing double pane windows in all 20 rooms, replacing exterior walls and adding insulation around the windows, installing individual heating and air-conditioning

Amicus Curiae Brief — Pacific Lumber Co. v. Marbled Murrelet

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2000

or the identical provisions in the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. … For example, until 1978, only 25 cases were brought directly against alleged polluters under the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Shell Oil Products Co., L.L.C., et al., Petitioners v. Rhode Island

Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · Dec 2, 2022

In relevant part, the court concluded that “we cannot rule that any federal common law controls Rhode Island’s claims” because the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act “‘have statutorily displaced any … By contrast, the First Circuit held that, because the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act “have statutorily displaced any federal common law that previously existed,” state law governs claims in this

Amicus Curiae Brief — Oklahoma, et al., Petitioners v. Environmental Protection Agency, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · May 1, 2024

All parties have received timely notification of the filing of this brief. 2 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT There are a lot of hard Clean Air Act (CAA) cases. This is not one of them. … The Clean Air Act divides judicial review of EPA actions into one of two general categories: Actions that are either nationally applicable or of nationwide effect go to the D.C.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Xanadu Corp., et al., Petitioners v. Meor Adlin, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · Jul 25, 2024

Clean Diesel, 2016 WL 6248426, at *22 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2016), aff’d sub nom. Clean Diesel, 895 F.3d 597 (9th Cir. 2018), and aff’d sub nom. Clean Diesel, 741 F. App’x 367 (9th Cir. 2018). 3. … App.11a 2015, including the names of the employees that maintained the records for these two time periods.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — City of Independence v. Tyler

Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · 1986

The closest home to the site is approxi- mately eight hundred to one thousand feet, and the air in the neighborhood is reasonably clean and odor free. … the submittal of written comments.

Respondents Brief — ExxonMobil Corporation, et al., Petitioners v. Environment Texas Citizen Lobby, Incorporated, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Respondents Brief · Jun 3, 2025

Statutory and Regulatory Background The Clean Air Act exists “to protect and enhance the quality of the Nation’s air resources so as to promote the public health and welfare and the productive capacity … The only instability in the law arose when petitioners injected novel Clean Air Act interpretations and standing theories into this case.

Memorandum — City of Highland Park v. Train

Supreme Court brief · Memorandum · 1976

Train, D.D.C., No. 1031- 72, decided November 15, 1974 8 Statutes: Clean Air Act, 81 Stat. 485, as amended and added, 42 U.S.C. 1857, et seq.: Section 109(a) (1), 42 U.S.C. 1857c- are See eV OMT … The court of appeals agreed that petitioners’ fail- ure to comply with the notice provision of Section 304 deprived the district court of jurisdiction under the Clean Air Act (Pet. App. A23-A25).

Reply Brief — Sprenger, Olson & Shutes, P. A. v. Burlington Northern Railroad

Supreme Court brief · Reply Brief · 1987

Delaware Valley Citizens Coun- cil For Clean Air, 55 U.S.L.W. 5113 (June 13, a hr Ak Se UR a ohn ba SES o 0d wees Rajender v. University of Minnesota, 546 F.Supp. … Delaware Valley Citizens Council For Clean Air, 55 U.S.L.W. 5113 (June 18, 1987).

Opposition Brief — Akin v. Ashland Chemical Co.

Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 1999

Therefore, a contractor acting under the United States Department of the Air Force, an agency of the United ee PARR RE MS aes NPIS RIN er RP AT Resp. … Plaintiffs, employed by the Air Force at Tinker Air Force Base (“TAFB”) in aircraft maintenance positions in the Chemical Cleaning Unit (“CCU”) located in Building 3001, contend that they have central

Supplemental Brief — W.R. Grace & Co. v. United States (No. 07-1287)

Supreme Court brief · Supplemental Brief · 2007

But because the criminal “knowing endangerment” provision of the Clean Air Act expressly cross- references the list of hazardous air pollutants subject to regulation by the EPA, see 42 U.S.C. … This case proves that point in the starkest of terms: individuals and businesses subject to the Clean Air Act are entitled to conclude that “Asbestos” within the meaning of § 7412(b) means what the

Amicus Curiae Brief — Alcan Aluminum Corp. v. United States

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2004

The inescapable and unrefuted fact is that PCBs have background levels in the natural environment -- in the air, ' water, and soil. … may act later to cause damage." [Prosser] at 348.

Amicus Curiae Brief — County of Maui, Hawaii, Petitioner v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · May 16, 2019

Air Regulatory Grp. v. … EPA, 134 S.Ct. 2427, 2444 (2014) (describing EPA’s interpretation of the Clean Air Act, in part, as “laying claim to extravagant statutory power over the national economy”); Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco

Opposition Brief — Lynn Hamlet, Petitioner v. Officer Hoxie

Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · Oct 27, 2023

Even if this generic comment in dicta is precedential, it is too general a proposition with which to discern whether Officer Hoxie’s specific alleged conduct is unlawful. See City of Tahlequah v. … A small opening at the top allow[ed] entry by ladder down into the well for cleaning and maintenance. . . . During the cleaning process the flow of raw sewage into the wet-well [was] continuous.”