environmental enforcement
Supreme Court case could drastically alter federal enforcement on environmental and investment issues
The outcome of a pivotal Supreme Court case could dramatically reshape federal authority in tackling investment fraud and environmental violations.
- The case, SEC v. Jarkesy, questions the extent of federal agencies' power in penalizing investment fraud.
- Implications extend to environmental enforcement at agencies like the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Environmental Protection Agency, affecting polluters and infrastructure projects.
- The decision could redefine the scope of federal regulatory authority.
Key quote:
"“I am inherently suspicious of reforms that are being strongly advocated by actors who need strong policing."
— Gillian Giannetti, senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Why this matters:
This case could significantly impact health and safety regulations, potentially altering how the government manages environmental and financial misconduct and enforces rules.
How would changes in federal enforcement affect your community or profession?
As EPA fails to fine oil and gas polluters, New Mexico officials demand answers
Can the EPA get environmental justice right?
In 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency promised justice in the Texas town of Port Arthur. Some residents say the EPA failed then, but now they see a potential path forward.
EPA needs a Senate-confirmed enforcement chief, groups say
U.S. trade representative uses her first speech to call for action on climate change
The oil well next door: California's silent health hazard
Unlike other oil-producing states, much of the drilling in California takes place in residential neighborhoods, often in Spanish-speaking communities. Despite mounting complaints about pollution from the wells, the state has failed to take action.