States Going Green

The United States, as a whole, has lagged far behind other nations in regards to global warming and taking measures to reduce emissions. Of the 141 nations bound by the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the United States is not included. Mostly, the United States has left the global warming discussion in the hands of individual states, but not entirely.

There are many states which, to combat global warming, enact legislation within their borders that affects only their residents and the state itself. These regulations, such as California's A.B. 1493 and California Health and Safety Code 43018.5, routinely attempt to curb motor vehicle emissions or those being produced by power plants and other industrial businesses.

Yet these internal codes and regulations are sometimes met by corporate and, more likely, federal opposition (California, under the Clean Air Act, is allowed to impose stricter emission standards, but even California has been challenged on the forcefulness of its legislation).

"The Clean Air Act specifically prohibits a state from creating its own emission standard except that the Act does permit a state to adopt standards that are identical to California's," (Mahoney, 2006). This is curious because even California has met resistance by auto makers and the federal government when it comes to emission standards imposed by the state. Most of the standards were preempted by the federal government on grounds that the standards were found to be in contradiction to the Clean Air Act, the very Act giving California the permission to enact more stringent emission standards.  

Many states have created, and been allowed to create, internal agencies that aid in regulating greenhouse gas emission within the state. There are many differing ideas and concepts through which states go about curbing emissions and many of these agencies and their policies have not been questioned or ridiculed by the federal government. It is when states attempt to encompass bigger state emission standards, those that step on the toes of big corporations or the federal government that things becomes harried. When this happens the states appear in court. And courts favor federal agencies.

"Like a great number of environmental cases, most of the cases advanced on this issue have been dismissed due to jurisdictional problems such as political questions or standing. Other traditional problems also arise such as causation in the case of common law claims. Legal challenges against the Environmental Protection Agency and other administrative bodies have the additional challenge that courts give agencies a great deal of discretion to these entities," (Mahoney, 2006).

States have pressed for greater cooperation by the EPA on global warming. No federal statutes specifically acknowledge global warming as a problem, so these attempts are to bring greater attention to global warming through EPA regulations on emissions. "The focus of these attempts has been on reducing emissions from mobile sources through federal action," (Mahoney, 2006).


But even as these roadblocks impede state regulations on a certain level and an overall national statute on emissions, more and more states are banding together for the cause of global warming sending a message of growing concern. So far, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Montana, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, California, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Wisconsin, Maine, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, have taken to the cause.

"Despite the fact that the more aggressive measures taken by states have been impeded, the federal government will need to be accountable to its citizens," (Mahoney, 2006).

Source: Urban Lawyer; Summer2006, Vol. 38 Issue 3, p585-591, 7p