Earthjustice’s President Trip van Noppen announced last November that he will be stepping down after a very successful 10 years at the helm.
An interesting job opportunity at UC Berkeley Law School that came across my email.
The UC Berkeley Environmental Law Clinic (ELC) is expanding to meet student demand, and we are delighted to be able to hire a full-time staff attorney (title, “Clinical Supervising Attorney”). I’d be grateful if you would direct potentially interested candidates with 5+ years of experience, including litigation experience to our job posting at:
https://aprecruit.berkeley.edu/apply/JPF01644
We envision a significant environmental justice component to the staff attorney’s docket, and are accordingly particularly eager to reach applicants of color/from underrepresented communities/with significant community lawyering experience or relevant professional networks.
ELC is a legal and policy clinic designed to train law students in innovative and effective environmental advocacy, make a real world environmental difference through high-impact projects, and address the environmental legal needs of underserved communities. The Clinic undertakes projects local to global in scale, working on such diverse issues as mitigating climate change, reducing the burden of environmentally induced disease, ensuring potable water and sanitation services for all, increasing children’s access to nature, and supporting green workforce development. The Clinic enrolls primarily JD students, but also some MPP and LLM students. The Clinic also includes and mentors a small number of undergraduate auditors in its seminar in an effort to diversify the pipeline of those practicing environmental law. The Clinic’s work is collaborative and multidisciplinary, and involves partnerships with Berkeley Law’s Center for Law, Energy, and the Environment; the Berkeley Center for Green Chemistry; and the School of Public Health.
Here is an interesting fellowship opportunity shared with me by Kenneth Wang, a 3L at UC Davis Law School:
“The Greenlining Institute has two fellowship opportunities, either in energy policy or environmental equity for J.D. graduates.(http://greenlining.org/leadership-academy/programs/fellowship-program/).
Santa Clara University Law School is offering a study-abroad program in Singapore this coming summer (May 21-June 8), focused on “Business and the Environment.” The course offers a comprehensive overview of legal issues located at the intersection of business, the environment, and climate change. Students will gain a global and regional perspective through the study of international and comparative environmental law, as well as a comparative study of legal systems and traditions of the various nations within Southeast Asia such as Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Vietnam. The course will also address business and tax issues that are associated with environmental issues. The faculty is drawn from U.S. and local law schools in Singapore and consists of internationally renowned experts in business and environmental law.
For additional info, please visit the program website: http://international.scu.edu/index.cfm?FuseAction=Programs.ViewProgram&Program_ID=10008. Please share this info with any person who might be interested in this topic.
For questions, please contact Carly Koebel (program administrator) at ckoebel@scu.edu or Professor Tseming Yang (program director) at tyang@scu.edu.
As a scholar in the Bannan Institute’s Environmental Justice Collaborative, my podcast on the Angelita C case was recently published on the Bannan Institute’s website. Check it out.
https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/489882900
The Office of General Counsel Water Law Office (WLO) is recruiting for the position listed below. All interested applicants should click on the USAJOBS link below and follow the instructions under “How To Apply.”
Job Title: Attorney-Adviser, GS-905-12
Job Announcement Number: EPA-OGC-2018-0004
Open Period: Monday, January 29, 2018 to Monday, February 12, 2018
https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/489882900
2017-18 HENRY L. DIAMOND
CONSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW WRITING COMPETITION
The U.S. Constitution has long been interpreted by judges and understood by most Americans to support comprehensive environmental protection. However, arguments questioning the constitutional legitimacy or application of environmental law continue to be made, while other parties have brought constitutional and common-law claims in support of preserving or expanding environmental protections. ELI invites law students to submit papers exploring current issues of constitutional environmental law. This annual writing competition is made possible through the generous support of Beveridge & Diamond PC, one of the nation’s premier environmental law firms.
THE HENRY L. DIAMOND CONSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW PRIZE: The author of the article deemed best by a panel of judges will receive $2000 cash, publication in ELI’s flagship publication, the Environmental Law Reporter, and a one-year individual membership to ELI.
TOPIC: Any topic addressing developments or trends in U.S. environmental law with a significant constitutional, “federalism,” or other cross-cutting component. (See sample topics below.)
ELIGIBILITY: Students currently enrolled in law school (in the U.S. or abroad) are eligible, including students who will graduate in 2018. Any relevant article, case comment, note, or essay may be submitted, including writing submitted for academic credit. Jointly authored pieces are eligible only if all authors are students and consent to submit. Previously published pieces, or pieces that are already slated for publication, are ineligible.
DEADLINE: Entries must be received no later than 11:59 pm ET on Monday, April 9, 2018. Please email entries (and any questions) to Lovinia Reynolds at reynolds@eli.org. You will receive a confirmation of receipt by email.
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:
Cover page. This separate page must include the following information:
Title;
Author’s name, year in law school, and expected graduation date (to facilitate impartial judging, the author’s name and law school must NOT appear anywhere else in the entry, other than on this cover page);
Law school name and address;
Author’s permanent and school mailing addresses, email address, and phone number (IMPORTANT: indicate effective dates for any contact information that is subject to change);
Abstract (limited to 100 words) describing the piece; and
Certification that the article has not been published and is not slated for future publication (while authors may submit their articles to other publishers or competitions, acceptance for publication elsewhere will disqualify an entry from further consideration).
Format. Submissions may be of any length up to a maximum of 50 pages (including footnotes), in a double-spaced, 8.5 x 11-inch page format with 12-point font (10-point for footnotes, single-spaced). Citation style should conform to the Bluebook. Submissions must be made by email attachment in Microsoft Word format, with the cover page as a separate attachment.
CRITERIA & PUBLICATION: The prize will be awarded to the student work that, in the judgment of our reviewers, best advances the state of scholarship and informs the debate on a current topic of constitutional environmental law. ELI reserves the right to determine that no submission will receive the prize. While only one cash prize is available, ELI may decide to extend multiple offers of publication in the Environmental Law Reporter. To learn more about ELI, including the results of past writing competitions, please visit http://www.eli.org and http://www.eli.org/constitution-courts-and-legislation/diamond-constitutional-environmental-law-writing-competition.
SAMPLE TOPICS: Students may develop their own constitutional environmental law topic or submit a piece exploring one of the topics below:
1) Claims that actions of the Executive Branch or of Congress violate the principle of separation of powers. E.g., Public Citizen v. Trump, No. 1:17-cv-00253 (D.D.C. Feb. 8, 2017) (challenging “two-for-one” executive order); Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Zinke, No. 3:17-cv-00091 (D. Alaska Apr. 20, 2017) (challenging invalidation of existing regulation under the Congressional Review Act); League of Conservation Voters v. Trump, No. 3:17-cv-101 (D. Alaska May 3, 2017) (challenging reversal of presidential withdrawals of coastal areas from oil and gas leasing); Defenders of Wildlife v. Duke, No. 3:17-cv-01873 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2017) (challenging waiver of environmental protections for border security facilities); NRDC v. Trump, No. 1:17-cv-02606 (D.D.C. Dec. 7, 2017) (challenging the shrinking of Bears Ears National Monument).
2) Role of the states under cooperative federalism, concerning issues like the EPA’s disapproval of state plans for controlling atmospheric haze, e.g., Texas v. EPA, 829 F.3d 405 (5th Cir. 2016), voluntarily remanded to agency, No. 16-60118, ECF No. 513923006 (Mar. 22, 2017), or the status of the Clean Air Act waivers that allow California to set vehicle emissions standards, e.g., 81 Fed. Reg. 78,149 (Nov. 7, 2016).
3) Claims that state efforts to pursue environmental goals violate the Dormant Commerce Clause, e.g., North Dakota v. Heydinger, 825 F.3d 912 (8th Cir. 2016) (Minnesota renewable energy standard); or are preempted by federal law, e.g., Ass’n Des Éleveurs De Canards Et D’oies Du Québec v. Harris, 729. F.3d 937 (9th Cir. 2017) (holding that California sales ban on liver from force-fed birds is not preempted by federal law).
4) Claims that laws governing agricultural or environmental monitoring violate the First Amendment, e.g., W. Watersheds Project v. Michael, No. 16-8083, 2017 WL 3908875 (10th Cir. Sept. 7, 2017) (data collection); Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Wasden, No. 15-35960 (9th Cir. Jan. 4, 2017) (ag-gag law); or that product-labeling requirements compel speech in violation of the First Amendment, compare CTIA-The Wireless Ass’n v. City of Berkeley, Cal., 854 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir. 2017) (cell phone health warning), with Am. Beverage Ass’n v. City & Cty. of San Francisco, No. 16-16072, 2017 WL 4126944 (9th Cir. Sept. 19, 2017) (soda labeling).
5) The implications for environmental or natural resource protection of Supreme Court cases applying the Takings Clause. E.g., Murr v. Wisconsin, 137 S. Ct. 1933 (2017).
6) Novel common-law or constitutional theories advanced to promote environmental protection, e.g., Juliana v. United States, 217 F. Supp. 3d 1224 (D. Or. 2016) (denying federal government’s motion to dismiss in case presenting climate-related constitutional and public trust claims), petition for mandamus filed, No. 17-71692 (9th Cir. June 9, 2017); Foster v. Washington Dept. of Ecology, No. 75374-6-I, 2017 WL 3868481 (Wash. App. Div. 1 Sept. 5, 2017) (reversing trial court order pertaining to greenhouse gas rulemaking).
7) Other cross-cutting issues, including, e.g., statutory claims that agencies are required to consider climate change impacts, compare WildEarth Guardians v. United States Bureau of Land Mgmt., No. 15-8109, 2017 WL 4079137 (10th Cir. Sept. 15, 2017) (holding analysis was inadequate), with Sierra Club v. U.S. Dep’t of Energy, No. 15-1489, 2017 WL 3480702 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 15, 2017) (upholding analysis); or claims that an agency improperly delayed the effective date of a regulation, e.g., Clean Air Council v. Pruitt, 862 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (rule governing methane and other greenhouse gas emissions); American Lung Ass’n v. EPA, No. 17-1172 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 1, 2017) (ozone designations under Clean Air Act).
Citizen Yang 