Abstract
Federal climate change legislation seems increasingly likely, but at least some states are likely to continue pursuing independent initiatives. Courts, state governments, and EPA will then be faced with the question of how much room remains for state climate regulations. This Article argues for a bifurcated approach to the constitutional authority of states to pursue climate change mitigation. Courts should reject regulations that violate clear statutory preemption clauses, discriminate against interstate commerce, ban transactions under federal cap-and-trade schemes, or directly interfere with international agreements. In the remaining cases, this Article advocates adoption of a strong presumption of validity for state climate change regulation.
How to Cite
50 Ariz. L. Rev. 879 (2008)
23
Views
10
Downloads