Note by: Andrew Biggs

In Massachusetts v. EPA, SCOTUS ruled that the EPA had the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. In this note, UK Law graduate and former Articles Editor Andrew Biggs analyzes the current state of climate change litigation. Biggs further demonstrates the role Massachusetts v. EPA and other cases have played in deadlocking climate change remedies that could have stemmed from litigation.

VOLUME 14 - 2021-2022 ISSUE 2

14 Ky. J. Equine, Agric. & Nat. Res. L. 2 (2022).

Massachusetts v. EPA: A Pyrrhic Victory for Climate Change Litigation

An Analysis of the Current State of Climate Change Litigation and its Path Forward

Note Written By: Andrew Biggs

In Massachusetts v. EPA SCOTUS ruled that the EPA had the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. In this note, UK Law graduate and former Articles Editor Andrew Biggs analyzes the current state of climate change litigation. Biggs further demonstrates the role Massachusetts v. EPA and other cases have played in deadlocking remedies that could have stemmed from litigation.