Supreme Court to review shy frog case, decide whether land that isn’t habitat can be regulated as “critical habitat”

On Monday, the Supreme Court granted review in Weyerhauser v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services—a closely watched case about a federal … More

Can federalism’s flexibility recover endangered species?

The federal Endangered Species Act has generated a lot of conflict over the last 44 years, but has little to … More

Supreme Court’s muddled definition of property undermines and politicizes conservation

The Supreme Court’s vague definition of “property” undermines free-market environmentalism.

Has Justice Kennedy tied EPA’s hands on WOTUS?

Is EPA tied to Justice Kennedy’s mushy test for Clean Water Act jurisdiction? No. Federalism, the fact that it is a criminal statute, and Kennedy’s acknowledgment that the statute is hopelessly vague all justify EPA substantially narrowing bureaucrats’ authority.

Supreme Court should preempt state laws to save environmental federalism

If Congress can only protect its choices by broadly preempting states laws, it will. And, in the long run, states will have less room to protect the environment than they would if courts continued to enforce the balance. That would be a significant blow to both federalism and the environment.