64 Fla. L. Rev. 295 (2012)|
|
|
In American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut (AEP), the U.S. Supreme Court held that “the Clean Air Act and the EPA actions it authorizes displace any federal common law right to seek abatement of carbon-dioxide emissions from fossil-fuel fired power plants,” foreclosing the use of federal common law rights of action in climate change litigation. The Court left unanswered the question of whether the Clean Air Act also displaces state common law tort actions, suggesting that state-based claims such as public nuisance could play some part in future climate change litigation. The opinion, however, conveys the Court’s preference to confine climate change litigation to agency- and regulatory-focused actions, as opposed to common law tort actions. After briefly summarizing the case, this Comment considers the implications of that preference with regard to the “climate vulnerable”-populations that are disproportionately impacted by the effects of climate change-with a focus on Florida.
Stay Connected:
Sign up for the Florida Law Review Mailing List
eReader Ready:
Current Issue
Jan. 2013, Vol. 65, No. 1
Articles
David Haddock, Tonja Jacobi, & Matthew Sag, League Structure &Stadium Rent Seeking— the Role of Antitrust Revisited
Steven J. Cleveland, Resurrecting Deference to the Securities and Exchange Commission: Mark Cuban Trading on Inside information
Janai S. Nelson, The First Amendment, Equal Protection and Felon Disenfranchisement: A New Viewpoint
Sergio J. Campos, Erie as a Choice of Enforcement Defaults
Hanah Metchis Volokh, Constitutional Authority Statements in Congress
Sapna Kumar, The Accidental Agency?
Christian Turner, State Action Problems



