Podcasts about climate change law

Korrin Peterson shares how her two decades with the Buzzards Bay Coalition shaped her unconventional environmental law career, blending litigation, policy advocacy, grant management, and hands-on wastewater infrastructure work before transitioning into private practice at Bowditch & Dewey. She explains how environmental law extends far beyond statutes and regulations, requiring attorneys to understand science, engineering, public policy, and the financial realities facing municipalities and developers.   With practical insight for attorneys across practice areas, Korrin discusses: Why environmental law requires lawyers to understand science, infrastructure, and public policy alongside legal analysis How climate change, aging infrastructure, and seasonal population surges are creating growing challenges for Massachusetts coastal communities Why wastewater and environmental infrastructure projects are often politically and financially difficult for municipalities to address What attorneys in real estate, probate, and family law should watch for when handling coastal or environmentally sensitive properties Why environmental issues frequently emerge in real estate transactions through contamination, wetlands restrictions, and permitting requirements Why bringing environmental counsel into a project early can save clients significant time, expense, and regulatory complications How legislative advocacy differs from traditional legal practice and why lawyers play an important role in shaping evolving environmental policy   Throughout the conversation, Korrin emphasizes that environmental law is constantly evolving as communities adapt to changing environmental conditions, infrastructure limitations, and development pressures. She highlights the importance of long-term thinking, interdisciplinary problem-solving, and proactive legal strategy when navigating environmental challenges affecting businesses, municipalities, and property owners alike.   Featured Guest Korrin Peterson — Environmental attorney at Bowditch & Dewey, Korrin advises clients on environmental permitting, wastewater infrastructure, brownfields redevelopment, compliance, and real estate matters. Prior to joining Bowditch, she spent more than 20 years as Chief Advocate for the Buzzards Bay Coalition, where she led litigation, policy initiatives, and environmental infrastructure projects across southeastern Massachusetts. Connect with us on social!Instagram: mcle.newenglandLinkedIn: Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education, Inc. (MCLE│New England)X (Formerly Twitter): MCLENewEnglandBluesky: mclenewengland.bsky.socialFacebook: MCLE New England Important Note:Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education, Inc. (MCLE) is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to providing high-quality, practical continuing legal education for the legal community. As part of its educational mission, MCLE presents a wide range of viewpoints and instructional content intended solely for educational purposes.The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed by individual participants in this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of MCLE, its Board of Trustees, staff, or affiliated institutions. Inclusion of any material or commentary does not constitute an endorsement of any position on any issue by MCLE.

Opposition Leader Chris Hipkins wouldn't say whether his internal polling indicates he would need Te Pāti Māori's support to form a government if Labour is successful in this year's election. Speaking to Canterbury Mornings, the Labour Party leader said the internal polling he receives shows Labour in the “high thirties”, and he is confident the party is on the right track to win in November. "My goal is to make sure Labour gets the most votes and is in the strongest possible position going into any post-election discussion." After it was revealed that an ex-Labour staffer is behind the social media account "luxury_marmite_sandwich", which has been trolling Government MPs, Hipkins said it had nothing to do with his party, and that some of the content posted by the page was objectionable. "To be very, very clear, that has nothing to do with us" "I have asked my office to go back to him (ex-staffer) and be very clear that no footage that he had access to from his time working for us should be used in any of the material that he is producing now." They also discussed proposed changes to climate change laws, whether Hipkins believes there should be any further public funding for Christ Church Cathedral, and his thoughts on Judith Collins as she bows out of politics this week. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

According to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota has gotten warmer and wetter over the last century. It's one sign of a changing climate being seen in the state. As we continue to learn about the impacts of climate change, state leaders are taking steps to hold big companies accountable for their role in contributing to climate change. One route has been through the courts. Another has been through legislation that would make fossil fuel companies pay for their emissions. To learn where these efforts stand, MPR News host Nina Moini spoke with two guests who have been keeping an eye on these efforts in Minnesota and across the U.S. James Coleman is a professor of law at the University of Minnesota. And Margaret Barry is a climate litigation fellow at the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University.

The climate policy landscape in the US is in flux. Last month, the Environmental Protection Agency repealed its own power to regulate greenhouse gases. Two weeks later, the Supreme Court said it will hear a case which the city of Boulder, Colorado, brought against the oil companies ExxonMobil and Suncor that could determine the fate of lawsuits brought by cities and states against fossil fuel companies over damages from climate change.  Since its adoption in 2009, EPA's endangerment finding — which says that greenhouse gases harm public health and welfare — had formed the legal foundation for major federal climate regulations. In announcing its rescission, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin called it the largest single deregulatory event in US history. But the repeal may be held up in courts for years, and it's just one piece of a complicated regulatory puzzle.  Petitions for review challenging the EPA's rescission of the endangerment finding are due in just over a month. So how might these major policy swings play out in practical terms? What are the near- and long-term stakes at the federal and state levels? What are the reactions from and the preferences of industry? And how might all of this play out in terms of US greenhouse gas emissions? Today on the show, Bill Loveless speaks with Michael Gerrard and Jeff Holmstead about possible legal strategies and outcomes for challenges to both the endangerment finding rescission and the Boulder case. Michael is the founder and faculty director of the Columbia University Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. Before joining Columbia in 2009, he practiced environmental law in New York for three decades. Jeff is a partner and co-chair of the Environmental Strategies Group at Bracewell, LLP, an international law firm. From 2001 to 2005, he served as the assistant administrator for air and radiation in the EPA during the administration of President George W. Bush.  Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Gregory Vilfranc.  

(Mar 13, 2026) Governor Hochul says the state needs more time to meet its mandated climate goals because of estimated costs to consumers. But experts argue the price of climate change may be steeper. We dig into the politics and the science behind New York's climate law debate. Also: The Saranac Lake village board approved a lease for the Adirondack Park Agency to move its headquarters from Ray Brook to the village.

Over the past few weeks the Trump administration has significantly upped its game to eliminate greenhouse gas regulations that protect human and global health. The Sabin Center on Climate Change Law's “Climate Backtracker” database presently identifies over 320-related administrative and regulatory actions that in sum undermine the EPA's mission to protect human health and the environment. Most recently, the US has withdrawn from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and 65 other related international organizations, rescinded National Environmental Protection Act's (NEPA) implementing regulations and moved to roll back automotive fuel efficiency standards by nearly 33%. Concerning the Clean Air Act, initially passed in 1963, the EPA is expected to soon finalize a 2025 proposed rule to rescind its Endangerment Finding that provides the legal basis for the agency to regulate six greenhouse gasses and recently announced the agency is no longer estimating the monetary value of lives saved in establishing the limits of two major air pollutants: ozone; and, fine particulate matter frequently noted as PM 2.5. The Columbia University Sabin Center “Climate Backtracker” database is at: https://climate.law.columbia.edu/content/climate-backtracker. Information on Resources for the Future is at: .https://www.rff.org/.Dr. Hubbell's bio is at: https://www.rff.org/people/bryan-hubbell/. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thehealthcarepolicypodcast.com

Climate change has been described as a “super wicked” policy problem. Policymakers face profound difficulties in assessing the magnitude of the risks, the costs of potential solutions, and the challenges of collective action. Because climate change is global in scope, the source of emissions is often seen as less important than their overall volume. Yet despite extensive efforts by many countries, including the United States at various times, worldwide carbon emissions continue to rise.Frustration with this state of affairs has led some state and local authorities to pursue climate litigation in addition to legislative or regulatory action. These lawsuits allege that energy producers are responsible for substantial monetary harms; and taken together, they seek many billions or even trillions of dollars in damages. Many recent cases focus on claims that companies misrepresented the effects of fossil fuels on the environment in violation of state consumer protection laws.On October 8, 2025, join us for a panel discussion examining the legal and policy issues raised by these cases, including: • Preemption under the Clean Air Act and federal common law; • Challenges in demonstrating causation and attribution; • Possible implications for First Amendment protections; • Allocation of damages among dozens of energy companies, including state-owned firms that may be shielded by sovereign immunity. • The contributing role of both plaintiffs and other beneficiaries of fossil fuels; and • Whether litigation is likely to help advance efforts to address climate change.Featuring:David Bookbinder, Director of Law & Policy, Environmental Integrity ProjectProfessor Michael Gerrard, Andrew Sabin Professor of Professional Practice and Founder and Faculty Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia Law SchoolProfessor Donald J. Kochan, Professor of Law and Executive Director of the Law & Economics Center, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityAdam White, Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Director, Scalia Law’s C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State(Moderator) Michael Buschbacher, Partner, Boyden Gray PLLC

Join Imran Akram, Ammar Ahmad & Sabah Zafar for Monday's show from 4-6pm where we will be discussing: 'Climate Liability' and ‘NHS Can it Survive' Climate Liability With just 57 companies responsible for 80% of greenhouse gas emissions since 2016, and research linking major oil companies to specific heatwaves and climate disasters, questions of legal and financial liability are becoming impossible to ignore. Join us as we explore who should bear responsibility for climate damages, examine legal battles against fossil fuel giants, and consider what climate justice means for affected communities. NHS can it survive The NHS has long been the crown jewel of Britain's welfare system, but missed cancer targets, rising waiting lists, and a shift toward private care now raise urgent questions: can it still deliver on its founding promise, or are we heading toward a two-tier system? Join us as we explore the growing pressures on the NHS, the debate over privatisation, and why more young people are turning to private care. Guests: Professor Michael Gerrard - Founder of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University and a leading authority on climate litigation and corporate accountability. Dr Tony O'Sullivan - co-chair and retired consultant paediatrician at KONP (Keep our NHS public) Allyson Pollock - Clinical Professor of Public Health and Co-Director of the Centre of Excellence in Regulatory Sciences at Newcastle University Producers: Aisha Aullybux and Mariam Munib

The US Environmental Protection Agency plans to rescind the foundation of its authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.  Eliminating the so-called “endangerment finding” is a key part of President Trump's efforts to reverse Obama- and Biden-era climate policy. The finding was also targeted in the conservative Project 2025 strategy to reshape the federal government. But the rollback won't happen without a fight, and the endangerment finding has held up to past legal challenges. Meanwhile, international courts are moving in the opposite direction. The International Court of Justice recently ruled that countries have legal obligations to address climate change and that fossil fuel subsidies could constitute "internationally wrongful acts." So what would overturning the endangerment finding mean for US climate policy? What legal and scientific arguments is the administration using? And how do these conflicting domestic and international trends shape the future of energy and climate policy? This week, Bill speaks to Michael Gerrard about how the EPA is rescinding its own ability to regulate greenhouse gases. Michael is the founder and faculty director of Columbia's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. Before joining Columbia in 2009, Michael practiced environmental law in New York for three decades. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Gregory Vilfranc.  

Anthropocentric warming, the greatest threat to human health and survival, disproportionately threatens children. Children pay the greatest climate penalty. Per the World Health Organization, children suffer more than 80% of climate crisis-related injuries, illnesses & deaths being more vulnerable to carbon-polluted air, extreme heat, drought and innumerable other climate-charged disasters and diseases. Nevertheless, the US healthcare accounts for an ever-increasing amount of carbon pollution and refuses to divest in fossil fuels. As for federal policymakers, the White House and Congressional Republicans remain intent on committing ecocide. To the surprise of no one, in late May Our Children's Trust, on behalf of 22 plaintiffs age 7 to 25, sued President Trump and five administrative offices and departments arguing in part several White House Executive Orders will increase fossil fuel use and dismantle climate research, warnings and response infrastructure. The lead plaintiff in Lighthiser v Trump stated White House policy amounts to a “death sentence for my generation.” The WCC handbook available at: https://www.oikoumene.org/news/wcc-publishes-resource-on-legal-tools-for-climate-justice. The Lighthiser v Trump complaint is at: https://climatecasechart.com/case/lighthiser-v-trump/.Among related discussions, I interviewed the Michael Burger at Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law in May 2020 and again in June 2024 and Andrea Rodgers with Our Children's Trust this past January. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thehealthcarepolicypodcast.com

Congress is rushing to enact what could be the most significant energy policy reversal in decades. The US Senate has begun work on an enormous budget reconciliation bill that would extend President Trump's tax cuts while all but eliminating clean energy programs to help pay for them. The House version substantially repeals nearly all tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act—affecting everything from solar and wind development to hydrogen and carbon capture projects. According to the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School/Columbia Climate School, approximately $9.65 billion in unobligated IRA funds  are at risk of rescission. Critics of the cuts say this could kill progress toward decarbonization, and pull the plug on US clean energy manufacturing. But supporters argue it's necessary fiscal discipline. So what's really happening in the Senate? Can moderate Republicans preserve some clean energy provisions? And with a Fourth of July deadline looming, what wildcard events could change the political calculus? This week, Bill Loveless speaks with energy analyst Kevin Book about the massive budget reconciliation bill currently moving through Congress and what it could mean for US energy policy. Kevin is managing director of research at ClearView Energy Partners. He has tracked congressional energy legislation and its real-world impacts for years. In addition to leading ClearView's research team, he is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the National Petroleum Council, an advisory body to the Secretary of Energy. He's also a non-resident senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

The day 65-year-old Julie Leon died was the hottest day ever recorded in Washington State history. Her death was officially ruled as hyperthermia, or overheating. Officially, more than 100 people died in the state due to that extreme 2021 heat wave, but many experts believe the number of deaths exceeds 400. Last week, Julie’s daughter, Misti Leon, filed a lawsuit, pointing the finger at who she thinks is responsible: big oil. The lawsuit claims that oil and gas companies have been knowingly misleading the public for more than 50 years about the effects of fossil fuels on the climate. It says this deception has made them trillions of dollars, while leading to the deaths of people like Julie Leon. Guest: Korey Silverman-Roati, a Senior Fellow at the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School Related Links: Oil companies face a wrongful death suit tied to climate change Leon v. Exxon Complaint PDF Oil Companies Are Sued Over Death of Woman in 2021 Heat Wave Thank you to the supporters of KUOW, you help make this show possible! If you want to help out, go to kuow.org/donate/soundsidenotes Soundside is a production of KUOW in Seattle, a proud member of the NPR Network. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Global hunger has hit a new high. The United Nations says nearly 300 million people faced acute hunger last year. And the outlook for 2025 is bleak due to wars and cuts in aid. So which countries are experiencing the worst of the global food crisis? And who are the most vulnerable? In this episode: Chris Gunness, Former Director, Communications, United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine and the Near East. Elise Nalbandian, Regional Advocacy and Campaign Manager, Oxfam, Africa. Sara Hayat - Specialist in Climate Change Law and Policy. Host: Adrian Finighan Connect with us:@AJEPodcasts on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

A recent legal judgment could force Greenpeace to pay $667 million in defamation and vandalism-related damages, from the 2016 protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline leading environmentalists to worry that the ruling could have a chilling effect on climate activism. Michael Gerrard, professor of law at Columbia Law School and the founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, shares his legal analysis of the case, and what it could mean for the environment.

The 20th episode in this series focuses on “The Rise of Climate Litigation,” featuring Michael Gerrard, Professor, Founder, and Faculty Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, in conversation with William F. Tarantino, partner in the Climate Change and Environmental Litigation + Regulatory practices at MoFo.

I'd like to report a murder. Trump's fossil lobby wants to strangle American climate science. You can't even talk about it. We track the worst with Romany Webb from the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, and reporter Bob Berwyn from Inside Climate  …

Our host Eva is joined by Michael Burger, Executive Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, and a Senior Research Scholar and Lecturer-at-Law at Columbia Law School. He is a co-author of Urban Climate Law (Columbia U Press, 2023), and an editor or co-editor of Global Climate Change and U.S. Law (ABA Publishing, 2023); Combating Climate Change with Section 115 of the Clean Air Act: Law and Policy Rationales (Edward Elgar, 2020) and Climate Change, Public Health and the Law (Cambridge U Press, 2018). He is a regent and fellow at the American College of Environmental Lawyers, and a member of the Advisory Council at the Institute at Brown for Environment and Society and the Advisory Board of Urban Ocean Lab. He is also of counsel at the boutique environmental law firm Sher Edling LLP. Sabin Center for Climate Change Law website: https://climate.law.columbia.edu/New York City Climate Law Tracker: https://climate.law.columbia.edu/content/nyc-climate-law-trackerCLCPA Scoping Plan Tracker:  https://climate.law.columbia.edu/Scoping-Plan-TrackerClimate Backtracker:  https://climate.law.columbia.edu/content/climate-backtrackerClimate Attribution database: https://climateattribution.org/

Speaker: Arman Sarvarian, University of SurreyDate: Friday Lunchtime Lecture: Friday 31 January 2025Dr Arman Sarvarian will speak about his forthcoming monograph The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice to be published by Oxford University Press in April. The product of seven years' labour of approximately 170,000 words, the work includes a foreword by Professor August Reinisch of the University of Vienna and International Law Commission. The following is the summary of Oxford University Press:'The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice provides a comprehensive, practical, and empirical overview of the topic, establishing State succession as a distinct field with a cohesive set of rules.From the secession of the United States of America in 1784 to that of South Sudan in 2011, the book digests and analyses State practice spanning more than two centuries. It is based on research into a wide and diverse range of case studies, including archival and previously unpublished data. Reconstructing the intellectual foundation of the field, the book offers a vision for its progressive development - one that is rooted in an interpretation of State practice that transcends the politics of the codification projects in the decolonization and desovietization eras.The book examines international law on State succession with respect to territorial rights and obligations, State property (including archives) and debt, treaties, international claims and responsibility, as well as nationality and private property (including concessions and investments). Its central focus is identifying the general rules of international law in order to guide States in the negotiation of succession agreements, the interpretation of ambiguous or incomplete provisions, and the regulation of succession in default of specific agreement.A highly relevant work, The Law of State Succession offers governments, judges, legal practitioners, and scholars an authoritative account of the current law. It enables negotiators to identify different legal paths within succession and assists adjudicators in interpreting provisions of succession agreements and regulating questions omitted from such agreements.' The book is available for pre-order at the OUP website.Dr Arman Sarvarian a public international lawyer in academia and private practice. A Reader in Public International Law at the University of Surrey, he regularly acts as legal adviser and counsel to States, companies and individuals. He is counsel to the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire in the pending Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change advisory proceedings of the International Court of Justice and counsel in two pending investor-State arbitrations. Since 2019, he has served as legal adviser to the Republic of Armenia at the Legal Committee of the UN General Assembly for the annual reports of the International Law Commission and International Court of Justice as well as multilateral negotiations on reform of investor-State arbitration in Working Group III of the UN Commission on International Trade Law. He served as judge ad hoc in the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in 2020.A generalist of broad interests and expertise, his first monograph Professional Ethics at the International Bar (Oxford University Press, International Courts and Tribunals Series, 19 September 2013) was the first comprehensive work on the subject and has been widely cited, including in proceedings before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, investment arbitrations and the International Court of Justice. His second monograph The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice will be published by Oxford University Press in April 2025. He is a Humboldt Research Fellow in Climate Change Law at the University of Kiel from 2024 to 2026. Chair: Dr Jamie Trinidad, Centre Fellow

Speaker: Arman Sarvarian, University of SurreyDate: Friday Lunchtime Lecture: Friday 31 January 2025Dr Arman Sarvarian will speak about his forthcoming monograph The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice to be published by Oxford University Press in April. The product of seven years' labour of approximately 170,000 words, the work includes a foreword by Professor August Reinisch of the University of Vienna and International Law Commission. The following is the summary of Oxford University Press:'The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice provides a comprehensive, practical, and empirical overview of the topic, establishing State succession as a distinct field with a cohesive set of rules.From the secession of the United States of America in 1784 to that of South Sudan in 2011, the book digests and analyses State practice spanning more than two centuries. It is based on research into a wide and diverse range of case studies, including archival and previously unpublished data. Reconstructing the intellectual foundation of the field, the book offers a vision for its progressive development - one that is rooted in an interpretation of State practice that transcends the politics of the codification projects in the decolonization and desovietization eras.The book examines international law on State succession with respect to territorial rights and obligations, State property (including archives) and debt, treaties, international claims and responsibility, as well as nationality and private property (including concessions and investments). Its central focus is identifying the general rules of international law in order to guide States in the negotiation of succession agreements, the interpretation of ambiguous or incomplete provisions, and the regulation of succession in default of specific agreement.A highly relevant work, The Law of State Succession offers governments, judges, legal practitioners, and scholars an authoritative account of the current law. It enables negotiators to identify different legal paths within succession and assists adjudicators in interpreting provisions of succession agreements and regulating questions omitted from such agreements.' The book is available for pre-order at the OUP website.Dr Arman Sarvarian a public international lawyer in academia and private practice. A Reader in Public International Law at the University of Surrey, he regularly acts as legal adviser and counsel to States, companies and individuals. He is counsel to the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire in the pending Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change advisory proceedings of the International Court of Justice and counsel in two pending investor-State arbitrations. Since 2019, he has served as legal adviser to the Republic of Armenia at the Legal Committee of the UN General Assembly for the annual reports of the International Law Commission and International Court of Justice as well as multilateral negotiations on reform of investor-State arbitration in Working Group III of the UN Commission on International Trade Law. He served as judge ad hoc in the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in 2020.A generalist of broad interests and expertise, his first monograph Professional Ethics at the International Bar (Oxford University Press, International Courts and Tribunals Series, 19 September 2013) was the first comprehensive work on the subject and has been widely cited, including in proceedings before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, investment arbitrations and the International Court of Justice. His second monograph The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice will be published by Oxford University Press in April 2025. He is a Humboldt Research Fellow in Climate Change Law at the University of Kiel from 2024 to 2026. Chair: Dr Jamie Trinidad, Centre Fellow

To begin my 14th year podcasting . . . , per the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Unversity, as of last September there were 1,850 climate crisis-related cases filed in the US challenging climate policy under constitutional, federal statutory including securities and financial regulations, state law claims and under several other categories. Law suits have been and will continued to be filed for the simple reason Congressional lawmaking and state legislating have failed to legitimately address the climate crisis, i.e., reduce CO2e emissions. Ms. Rodgers, Deputy Director, US Strategy at Our Children's Trust, a public interest law firm dedicated to securing children's legal rights to a healthy climate, discusses the current state of Juliana v the US initially filed in 2015, the 2023 Held v Montana decision in favor of 16 young people and a favorable 2024 settlement agreement resulting form Navahine F in which Hawaii's DOT agreed to move aggressively to achieve a net zero ground transporation system. Ms. Rodgers also discusses OCT's ongoing Genesis v the EPA case and the current International Court of Justice effort to reach an advisory opinion regarding climate-related legal obligations. Listeners may recall I interviewed Ms. Rodgers regarding Juliana in February 2020 and most recently, or last June, I spoke again with Michael Burger, CEO of Columbia's Sabin Center, regarding climate litigation generally. The Sabin Center's litigation database is at: https://climatecasechart.com/.Our Children's Trust is at: https://www.ourchildrenstrust.org/.Judge Josephine Staton's January 2020 dissent in Juliana is at: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/01/17/18-36082.pdf. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thehealthcarepolicypodcast.com

Are you allowed to throw alkaline minerals into the sea? Ashwin Murthy explains how to do Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement, without ending up in jail. Ashwin Murthy, Korey Silverman-Roati & Romany M. Webb, State Authority to Regulate Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement, Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia Law School, December 2024 (2024). Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/sabin_climate_change/237

In this Convo of Flanigan's Eco-Logic, Ted speaks with Professor Michael Gerrard from Columbia University. He is the founder and faculty director of the groundbreaking Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, and one of the foremost environmental lawyers in the nation. Michael is an advocate, litigator, teacher, and scholar who has pioneered cutting-edge legal tools and strategies for addressing climate change. He writes and teaches courses on environmental law, climate change law, and energy regulation. He was the chair of the faculty of Columbia University's renowned Earth Institute from 2015 to 2018 and now holds a joint appointment to the faculty of its successor, the Columbia Climate School.He and Ted discuss his background, growing up in Charleston, West Virginia in an immensely polluted area, which led to his interest in studying and protecting the environment. He moved to New York City to attend Columbia University, and has been there ever since. He started his career in journalism, later deciding to become an environmental lawyer, and then shifted to writing books and entered the world of academia. Before joining the Columbia Law School faculty in 2009, Michael practiced law in New York for three decades, most recently as the partner in charge of the New York office of Arnold & Porter. As an environmental lawyer, he tried numerous cases and argued many appeals in federal and state courts and administrative tribunals. He also handled the environmental aspects of diverse transactions and development projects and provided regulatory compliance advice to an array of clients in the private and public sectors. Several publications rated him the leading environmental lawyer in New York and one of the leaders in the world.He has also written or edited 14 books, including Global Climate Change and U.S. Law, the first and leading work in its field (co-edited with Jody Freeman and Michael Burger), and Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization in the United States (co-edited with John Dernbach). His 12-volume Environmental Law Practice Guide and four-volume Brownfields Law and Practice each received the Association of American Publishers' Best Law Book of the Year award.He highlights some of his most impressionable career cases, and shares that he is currently leading a legal effort to sue the Governor for New York, Kathy Hochul, for indefinitely pausing the rollout of congestion pricing in New York City. He also shares with Ted his work with the government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands on the legal issues caused by rising sea levels that threaten the island nation.

On June 28, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a 40-year precedent established in the landmark 1984 case, Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council.  The precedent, commonly referred to as the “Chevron Doctrine,” gave federal agencies considerable discretion to interpret laws passed by Congress when implementing regulations and policy. But with the court's new ruling, federal agencies no longer have the final say on how laws are interpreted. Instead, the judiciary will hold that power.  So, how will the new ruling impact energy policy and environmental regulation? What are both proponents and opponents saying about the court's decision? And what does this mean more broadly for the modern administrative state?  This week host Bill Loveless talks with Michael Gerrard and Jeff Holmstead about the implications of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the Chevron Doctrine. Michael is the founder and faculty director of Columbia's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. From 2012 to 2018, he was the chair of the faculty of Columbia University's Earth Institute. Before joining Columbia in 2009, Michael practiced environmental law in New York for three decades. Jeff is a partner and co-chair of the Environmental Strategies Group at Bracewell LLP. From 2001 to 2005, he served as the assistant administrator for air and radiation in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Mr. Burger joins me to discuss climate crisis-related litigation here and abroad and its effectiveness in curbing greenhouse gas emissions. Dedicated listeners may recall I interviewed Mr. Burger in May 2020 regarding the Trump administration's unwinding of numerous environmental regulations. Michael Burger is the Executive Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. Prior to, he was an associate professor at Roger Williams University School of Law and served as an attorney in the Environmental Law Division of New York City's Office of the Corporation Counsel. He is a co-founder and member of the Environmental Law Collaborative, the incoming chair of the New York City Bar Association International Environmental Law Committee and is a widely-published scholar, a frequent speaker at conferences and symposiums and a regular source for media outlets. Mr. Burger graduated from Columbia Law School, Brown University and holds a MFA from NYU.Per my noting Sabin provides a monthly climate litigation update, their June report is at: https://climate.law.columbia.edu/news/june-2024-updates-climate-case-charts. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thehealthcarepolicypodcast.com

G+T alumna Romany Webb joins us from the Sabin Centre for Climate Change Law at Columbia University to talk about regulatory approaches to carbon dioxide reduction and removal on the critical path to net zero and beyond. Plus rethinking no-poach and non-compete agreements and competition law, more greenwashing action from ASIC and the ACCC, sky-high penalties for Qantas while Bonza is grounded, things get complicated at the Supermarket Prices Inquiry, and the history of Monopoly from Lizzie Magie to Barbie™. All this and more with co-hosts Moya Dodd and Matt Rubinstein.    The British Library on Lizzie Magie and the history of monopoly  Suki's pink Honda S2000 at the Petersen Automotive Museum  Treasury Consultation on Worker Non-Compete Clauses and Other Restraints and Assistant Minister Leigh's speech  G+T on the ACCC's action on Glad bags and ocean plastics  The Senate Greenwashing Inquiry hearings and ASIC Chair Joe Longo's speech on greenwashing and greenhushing  G+T on the Qantas settlement with the ACCC  The Senate Supermarket Prices Inquiry Final Report and MLex on its implications for merger reform  AFR on the PE firm behind Bonza  Meet the Gilbert + Tobin Competition, Consumer + Market Regulation team  Email us at edge@gtlaw.com.au   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Day in Legal History: Constitutional Convention AssemblesOn May 14, 1787, a pivotal moment unfolded in American history as delegates from each state began to gather in Philadelphia for what would be known as the Constitutional Convention. This assembly was critical in shaping the nation's future, aimed at addressing the deficiencies of the Articles of Confederation—the loose framework that initially bound the states together after independence.As the delegates arrived, the stakes were incredibly high. The existing government structure under the Articles was proving inadequate in managing various critical issues, such as interstate disputes and financial instability. The Philadelphia meeting was convened to create a more robust federal government while ensuring that individual liberties were not infringed upon.Notably, every state except Rhode Island sent representatives to the Convention. Among the attendees were some of the most distinguished figures of the era, including George Washington, who was unanimously elected as the president of the convention, and James Madison, now considered the "Father of the Constitution" due to his pivotal role in drafting the document.The convention sessions were held in strict secrecy, a decision made to foster open debate and prevent external influences. The result of the intense deliberations, which continued until September 17, was the creation of a new Constitution. This document established a stronger federal government with separate executive, legislative, and judicial branches, fundamentally changing the direction of the United States.The ratification process that followed was another intense debate, reflective of the diverse viewpoints within the states about the balance of power between state and federal authorities. The Federalist Papers, written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, played a crucial role in persuading the public and state legislatures to adopt the new Constitution.Today, the Constitution remains a living document, central to American law and governance, illustrating the enduring legacy of the decisions made during those historic months in Philadelphia. The events of May 14, 1787, mark not just the beginning of the Constitutional Convention but also the starting point of a constitutional democracy that would influence governance structures worldwide.Perkins Coie, a Seattle-founded law firm, is expanding its global footprint by launching a new office in London. The London office will be led by Ian Bagshaw, former co-head of White & Case's global private equity practice, who joined Perkins Coie after leaving Big Law to chair a startup. Joining him are three other former White & Case lawyers, including Jan Andrusko, who will serve as the European head of M&A for Perkins Coie.The London office aims to tap into the local and European markets for venture capital, private equity, and startups, leveraging the firm's established tech-sector expertise in the U.S. Perkins Coie plans to offer a comprehensive range of services through this single European hub, focusing on privacy, technology transactions, and M&A, without pursuing a network of offices across Europe.This strategic move marks Perkins Coie's first establishment outside of the U.S. and Asia. In 2021, the firm ranked 43rd largest in the U.S. by revenue, with earnings of $1.2 billion. The London office will initially feature a corporate group but may expand to include intellectual property and litigation services to provide a more rounded offering to tech-focused corporate clients.Ian Bagshaw, along with partners Jan Stejskal, Craig Fagan, and Barry O'Driscoll, and senior counsel Jan Jakoubek, are part of the founding team. They bring significant experience in private equity, cross-border M&A, and corporate law, aiming to recreate the startup culture prevalent in the U.S. within the European context. Bagshaw highlighted the startup-like environment of the new office and his motivation to build a new business with a clear strategic direction as key factors in his move to Perkins Coie.The focus on privacy and technology transactions in the new office is significant. These areas are crucial in the tech sector, involving the handling of sensitive data and the execution of tech-related deals, which are key growth areas in European legal markets. This strategic choice underlines Perkins Coie's intent to leverage their U.S. strengths in a new market, reflecting broader trends in global law practice where specialization aligns with industry needs.Perkins Coie Launches London Office, Eyeing Start-Up Tech MarketJury selection for U.S. Senator Robert Menendez's corruption trial resumed on May 14, 2024, in Manhattan federal court, with charges stemming from an alleged bribery scheme involving foreign governments. Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat, has denied wrongdoing, pleading not guilty to 16 charges, including bribery, fraud, acting as a foreign agent, and obstruction. The trial also involves two New Jersey businessmen, Wael Hana and Fred Daibes, and Menendez's wife, Nadine, who will be tried separately due to medical reasons.The accusations detail that Senator Menendez accepted substantial bribes, including cash, gold bars, and a luxury car, in return for political favors to the governments of Egypt and Qatar. The FBI discovered much of the cash hidden at the Menendezes' home. Menendez allegedly facilitated arms deals for Egypt and attempted to secure a monopoly for Hana on halal meat certifications to Egypt. He is also charged with attempting to influence a Qatari investment fund on behalf of Daibes and interfering in a criminal case against him.Despite the severity of these charges, Menendez has not resigned but has stepped down from his role as the leader of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. His previous legal troubles in 2017, involving a wealthy Florida ophthalmologist, ended in a mistrial. As the current trial unfolds, Menendez faces significant public disapproval in New Jersey, complicating any potential reelection efforts. His wife's trial is scheduled for July 8, where health concerns will play a central role, and Menendez might shift blame to her as part of his defense strategy.Jury selection to resume in US Senator Menendez's corruption trial | ReutersThe Delaware Supreme Court is set to hear an appeal concerning a substantial attorney fee award in a lawsuit involving Dell Technologies Inc. and a $1 billion stockholder settlement over a stock conversion, which was allegedly coerced by Michael Dell and Silver Lake LLC in 2018. This case, which is notable for its rare nine-figure fee award, reflects a broader discussion in Delaware about how much plaintiffs' attorneys should be compensated in significant legal settlements.In this particular case, attorneys who facilitated the historic settlement were awarded $267 million, which represents the second-highest fee ever awarded in the state's Chancery Court history. This award is currently being challenged by Pentwater Capital Management LP, which argues that the 27% fee is excessively generous and constitutes a windfall.The appeal comes at a time when Delaware's courts are also considering other large fee requests, including two involving Tesla Inc., where one case seeks a $230 million fee for a settlement concerning board compensation, and another involves an investor challenging CEO Elon Musk's pay package.The Delaware courts have historically used a multi-factor test to determine the fairness of legal fees, which considers the complexity of the case, the attorneys' skill and experience, and the risk of contingency. The debate over these fees has even drawn input from law professors, with some advocating for a declining-percentage method used in federal courts, which reduces the percentage fee as the settlement amount increases.This ongoing legal debate highlights the evolving challenges and considerations in determining reasonable compensation for legal services in major corporate litigation, especially in a state known for its significant corporate law cases.Dell Fee Request at Delaware High Court Could Impact Tesla SuitsThe legal battle involving 21 young plaintiffs in a significant U.S. climate lawsuit has reached a precarious point following a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The court granted a February request from the Justice Department to dismiss the case, known as Juliana v. US, directing Judge Ann Aiken of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon to terminate it. This lawsuit, aiming for government accountability on climate action, has seen setbacks before, including a 2020 dismissal where the plaintiffs' demands for more aggressive government intervention against global warming were deemed beyond judicial capability to grant.The plaintiffs, represented by Our Children's Trust, are now considering limited options, such as requesting a full panel rehearing at the Ninth Circuit or potentially escalating the matter to the U.S. Supreme Court. However, legal experts, including Michael Gerrard of Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, caution against the latter due to the Supreme Court's current composition, which may not be favorable towards climate-related cases.The recent ruling underscores judicial hesitancy to engage in what is seen as policy-making—a realm typically reserved for the legislative branch. Despite this, the plaintiffs' lawyer, Julia Olson, argues that a court declaration recognizing the unconstitutional nature of current government practices could be transformative, similar to past court interventions that advanced justice and equality. Yet, the feasibility of such outcomes appears increasingly doubtful under prevailing legal standards and judicial perspectives.With these challenges, some suggest that initiating a new lawsuit with updated claims might offer a more straightforward route, given the ongoing and emerging government failures in addressing climate change since the initial 2015 filing. This strategy could potentially bypass previous legal obstacles, presenting fresh grounds for legal arguments based on more recent developments in climate policy and its failures.Youth Climate Lawsuit Faces Dire Path After Ninth Circuit RulingJack Teixeira, a 22-year-old member of the Massachusetts Air National Guard, is facing further legal challenges after already pleading guilty to serious national security breaches involving the leak of classified documents. Teixeira, who had been arrested in April 2023, admitted to charges related to leaking sensitive information on military operations, including details about the war in Ukraine, under a deal with the U.S. Department of Justice that proposed a minimum of 11 years in prison. Despite this civilian court case, the Air Force has opted to pursue additional military charges against him, which could lead to another 10 and a half years in prison if he is convicted.These military charges include obstructing justice and failing to obey a lawful order, with a hearing set to take place at Hanscom Air Force Base in Massachusetts to assess whether the evidence is substantial enough to proceed to a court-martial. Teixeira, who worked as a cyber defense operations journeyman with top-secret security clearance, reportedly shared classified information on various international issues through a messaging app, impacting U.S. and global security interests. His sentencing for the civilian charges is scheduled for September 27.Pentagon leaker Jack Teixeira faces US military justice hearing | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The US Securities and Exchange Commission on March 6 finalized a long-awaited rule requiring thousands of publicly traded companies to disclose certain climate-related information. The final rule takes a narrower approach than what the SEC proposed in 2022; it also marks a significant change in the level of climate-related information that publicly listed companies must disclose in the US. In this episode of the ESG Insider podcast, we explore key components of the SEC rule and its implications for investors and companies — as well as how it fits in the broader global climate disclosure landscape.  We talk with Cynthia Hanawalt, a Director at the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, a think tank at Columbia Law School; she gives us an overview of the rule's requirements.   We speak to Bruno Sarda from professional services company EY, where he focuses on climate change and sustainability services. Bruno says a key message from the rule is that “climate risk is financial risk ... companies need to be ready to both measure, manage and communicate that risk."  We hear from Kristina Wyatt, Deputy General Counsel and Chief Sustainability Officer at carbon accounting software company Persefoni, about how the rule fits into the broader global disclosure landscape.   And to understand what's on the horizon for the rule, we hear from Elizabeth Dawson, a Partner at law firm Crowell & Moring where she is a leader on the ESG advisory team and Chair of the Sustainability Committee.  Read research from S&P Global Sustainable1 about the current US landscape for corporate climate disclosure: https://www.spglobal.com/esg/insights/featured/special-editorial/after-sec-rulemaking-assessing-the-us-climate-disclosure-landscape   Listen to the podcast episode we released when the SEC proposed its climate disclosure rule in 2022: https://www.spglobal.com/esg/podcasts/unpacking-implications-of-the-sec-s-proposed-climate-disclosure-rule   This piece was published by S&P Global Sustainable1, a part of S&P Global.     Copyright ©2024 by S&P Global     DISCLAIMER     By accessing this Podcast, I acknowledge that S&P GLOBAL makes no warranty, guarantee, or representation as to the accuracy or sufficiency of the information featured in this Podcast. The information, opinions, and recommendations presented in this Podcast are for general information only and any reliance on the information provided in this Podcast is done at your own risk. This Podcast should not be considered professional advice. Unless specifically stated otherwise, S&P GLOBAL does not endorse, approve, recommend, or certify any information, product, process, service, or organization presented or mentioned in this Podcast, and information from this Podcast should not be referenced in any way to imply such approval or endorsement. The third party materials or content of any third party site referenced in this Podcast do not necessarily reflect the opinions, standards or policies of S&P GLOBAL. S&P GLOBAL assumes no responsibility or liability for the accuracy or completeness of the content contained in third party materials or on third party sites referenced in this Podcast or the compliance with applicable laws of such materials and/or links referenced herein. Moreover, S&P GLOBAL makes no warranty that this Podcast, or the server that makes it available, is free of viruses, worms, or other elements or codes that manifest contaminating or destructive properties.

Law structures so much of our lives, but can feel inaccessible to those untrained. It is also in flux! How is the law being changed in response to climate change? Which laws can be adapted to suit our climate-changing country and world? And which are unprepared for new challenges? Today's episode of Carbon Removal Newsroom is hosted by Radhika Moolgavkar, Nori's VP of Supply and Methodology. She is joined by Romany Webb, the Deputy Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at the Columbia Law School. They discuss the evolving field of climate law, its critical role in the development of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies, and the unique legal challenges presented by ocean-based CDR methods. Webb highlights the growing interest among law students in climate technology and emphasizes the importance of legal frameworks in addressing climate change. The conversation delves into the complexities of international and local laws governing oceans, the innovative concept of Community Benefits Agreements for climate projects, and the positive feedback on model law proposals intended to regulate CDR activities safely. The episode underscores the necessity of a diverse portfolio of CDR solutions to combat the climate crisis and explores the legal opportunities and challenges facing the CDR industry's advancement. On This Episode ⁠⁠Radhika Moolgavkar⁠⁠ Romany Webb Resources Sabin Center for Change Law at the Columbia Law School Connect with Nori ⁠⁠Nori⁠⁠ ⁠⁠Nori's X account⁠⁠ Nori's other podcast ⁠⁠Reversing Climate Change⁠⁠ Nori's CDR ⁠⁠meme X account --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/carbonremovalnewsroom/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/carbonremovalnewsroom/support

Ohio, Indiana, and West Virginia have challenged the Environmental Protection Agency's “Good Neighbor” rule in the Supreme Court. The regulation is designed to keep one state's ozone emissions from spilling downwind and pushing another state out of compliance. Michael Burger from the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University explores what this challenge means for the environmental regulation landscape. Also, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has announced new measures to reduce the allowable amount of fine particulate pollution in the air. Former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy discusses these new standards, as well as the Inflation Reduction Act and the role of women in the environmental movement. To kick off Women's History Month, we dive into the legacy of women outdoors in America. From abolitionist Harriet Tubman to novelist Louisa May Alcott, some of the country's most important women trailblazers shared a connection with the natural world in their girlhood. Tiya Miles shares their stories in her book Wild Girls: How the Outdoors Shaped the Women Who Challenged a Nation. -- We rely on support from listeners like you to keep our journalism strong. You can donate at loe.org – any amount is appreciated! -- and thank you for your support. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A study published in 2021 found that 59 per cent of 10,000 young adults surveyed are extremely worried about climate change, with many experiencing negative effects on their daily lives. This phenomenon, termed "climate anxiety", is characterised by feelings of helplessness and fear due to the perceived enormity and complexity of climate change issues. In conjunction with IPS' annual flagship conference, Singapore Perspectives 2024, themed around the topic of youths, the sixth episode of the "IPS On Diversity" Season 4, delves into the psychological and emotional impact of climate change on young people. Host Liang Kaixin is joined by Melissa Low, a research fellow at the National University of Singapore's (NUS) Centre for Nature-based Climate Solutions, and Darren Quek, Principal of Forest School Singapore and a climate activist. Melissa and Darren discuss their personal experiences with climate anxiety and the broader implications of this emotional state on society. The conversation touches upon the role of media in shaping perceptions of climate change and the potential impact of climate anxiety on future demographic trends, like decisions around starting a family. The discussion concludes with suggestions for addressing climate anxiety, including seeking mental health support, and engaging in community and grassroots activities. The episode provides insights into the emotional toll of environmental issues on younger generations and the need for mental health support in the face of climate change. Find out more about adulting and housing in Singapore: Straits Times (17 July 2023): Green Pulse Podcast: Climate change is a mental health issue    Channel News Asia (30 March 2023): Commentary: Is ‘climate anxiety' a clinical diagnosis? Should it be? Asian Scientist (23 March 2023): The Climate Anxiety Issue  About our guests: Melissa Low, Research Fellow, Centre for Nature-based Climate Solutions, National University of Singapore Melissa Low is a Research Fellow at the National University of Singapore's (NUS) Centre for Nature-based Climate Solutions. At the Centre, Melissa leads Continuing Education and Training. She previously worked at the Energy Studies Institute, NUS where she carried out research projects on a range of energy and climate issues of concern to Singapore and the region. She has participated in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of Parties (COP) for over a decade and is an active sustainability thought leader, authoring, publishing and presenting at various forums. She is the Designated Contact Point for NUS's accreditation to the UNFCCC and currently serves as interim co-focal point on the nine-member Steering Committee of the Research and Independent Non-Governmental Organisation (RINGO) Constituency under the UNFCCC. Melissa holds an LLM in Climate Change Law and Policy (with distinction) from the University of Strathclyde, MSc in Environmental Management and BSocSci (Hons) in Geography from NUS. For her Master's thesis on past and contemporary proposals on equity and differentiation in shaping the 2015 climate agreement, Melissa was awarded the Shell Best Dissertation Award 2013. She is currently pursuing a PhD part-time at the NUS Department of Geography. Outside of work, Melissa started an eco-friendly/ social book swop movement in Singapore, called Books and Beer, which has been featured in The Straits Times, The Business Times, Bangkok Post and The Wall Street Journal's Scene Asia Blog. Darren Quek, Principal, Forest School Singapore Darren is the Principal of Forest School Singapore (FSS). He has spent 15 years in the field of Education, starting from a simple Assistant Trainer for Robotics and Game Programming, till where he is now, a Principal for FSS and Trail Blazer for Forest School Education in Singapore. He started the first Forest School in Singapore in 2016, after learning from and understudying from his Mentor Atsuko sensei, a Forest Kindergarten practitioner and parent in Japan. He also earned his Forest School Level 3 Practitioner Certification through time spent in Manchester and Sheffield undergoing training and assessments. More from On Diversity Season 4 Episode 5: Youth and Caregiving with Tan Poh Lin, Senior Research Fellow at IPS and Jason Leow Season 4 Episode 4: Home Alone and Adulting with Chew Han Ei, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow at IPS and Klinsen Soh Season 4 Episode 3: Hustle Culture and Quiet Quitting with Laurel Teo, Senior Research Fellow at IPS and He Ruiming, Founder of The Woke Salaryman Season 4 Episode 2: Destigmatising HIV and AIDS with Rayner Tan, Assistant Professor of NUS and Terry Lim, Associate Director of Action for AIDS Season 4 Episode 1: The Dual Challenges of Poverty and Single Motherhood with Carrie Tan, MP, Founder of Daughters of Tomorrow and Elizabeth Quek, Programme Manager at AWARE Season 3 Episode 9: Being Biracial in Singapore with Shane Pereira, Research Associate at IPS and Dave Parkash, Co-Founder at Fook Kin Restaurant Season 3 Episode 8: Pregnancy and Maternity Discrimination with Sher-li Torrey, Founder of Mums@Work and Kalpana Vignehsa, Senior Research Fellow at IPS Season 3 Episode 7: Palliative Care for the Young and Old with Dr Chong Poh Heng, Medical Director at HCA Hospice Limited and Tay Jia Ying, an end-of-life doula and Founder of Happy Ever After See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Around the world, activists are turning to the courts to hold major polluters accountable for climate change. This recently played out in the United States. Young plaintiffs in Montana successfully presented scientific evidence that connects the states' greenhouse gas emissions to environmental harm. Many legal experts say the case, Montana v. Held, is another major development for climate litigation. Other cases playing out across the globe show the courts could be a way to reduce CO2 emissions in the private sector.  So, what are some of the other major legal cases aimed at fighting climate change? And how could they impact the push to reduce global emissions?  This week, host Bill Loveless talks with Michael Gerrard about current trends in global climate change litigation, including the expanding range of legal theories that are being applied. Michael is the founder and faculty director of Columbia's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, where he writes and teaches courses on environmental law, climate change law, and energy regulation. He was the chair of the faculty of Columbia University's Earth Institute from 2015 to 2018. Before joining Columbia in 2009, Michael practiced environmental law in New York for three decades. The Sabin Center maintains a database that tracks climate change litigation around the world. As of December 31, 2022, the database included 2,180 cases. In addition, the Sabin Center and the UN Environment Program recently issued the 2023 “Global Climate Litigation Report,” which takes into account information from that database.

Last week, a judge in Montana ruled that the state has to take into account climate change mitigation when it weighs future fossil fuel projects. Samantha Maldonado, reporter at The City covering climate and resiliency, and Michael Gerrard, professor of law at Columbia Law School and the founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, discuss what this could mean for New York State, where voters passed a green amendment back in 2021. → What the Landmark Climate Ruling in Montana Means for New York

Welcome to my new Series "Can you talk real quick?" This is a short, efficiently produced conversation with an expert who will let me record a quick chat to help us all better understand an issue in the news or our lives as well as connect with each other around something that might be unfolding in real time.    Stand Up is a daily podcast that I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls NPR: "A Montana judge on Monday sided with young environmental activists who said state agencies were violating their constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment by permitting fossil fuel development without considering its effect on the climate. The ruling following a first-of-its- kind trial in the U.S. adds to a small number of legal decisions around the world that have established a government duty to protect citizens from climate change.   District Court Judge Kathy Seeley found the policy the state uses in evaluating requests for fossil fuel permits — which does not allow agencies to evaluate the effects of greenhouse gas emissions — is unconstitutional." I reached out to the founder and faculty director of the groundbreaking Sabin Center for Climate Change Law and one of the foremost environmental lawyers in the nation, Michael Gerrard is an advocate, litigator, teacher, and scholar who has pioneered cutting-edge legal tools and strategies for addressing climate change. He writes and teaches courses on environmental law, climate change law, and energy regulation. He was the chair of the faculty of Columbia University's renowned Earth Institute from 2015 to 2018.  For three decades, before joining the Columbia Law School faculty in 2009, Gerrard practiced law in New York, most recently as the partner in charge of the New York office of Arnold & Porter, where he remains senior counsel. As an environmental lawyer, he tried numerous cases and argued many appeals in federal and state courts and administrative tribunals. He also handled the environmental aspects of diverse transactions and development projects and provided regulatory compliance advice to an array of clients in the private and public sectors. Several publications rated him the leading environmental lawyer in New York and one of the leaders in the world. A prolific author, he has written or edited 14 books, including Global Climate Change and U.S. Law, the first and leading work in its field (co-edited with Jody Freeman and Michael Burger), and Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization in the United States (co-edited with John Dernbach). His 12-volume Environmental Law Practice Guide and four-volume Brownfields Law and Practice each received the Association of American Publishers' Best Law Book of the Year award. Gerrard is the former chair of the American Bar Association's 10,000-member Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources. He has also chaired the New York City Bar Association's Executive Committee and the New York State Bar Association's environmental law section. He has served on the executive committees of the boards of the Environmental Law Institute and the American College of Environmental Lawyers.  Gerrard also has taught courses at Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, and the University of Malta. He has lectured on environmental law in Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Denmark, France, Great Britain, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Malta, the Marshall Islands, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, Vatican City, and throughout the United States. He has worked with the government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands on the legal issues caused by rising sea levels that threaten the island nation. Follow Professor Gerrard on Twitter Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe

In this episode of Flanigan's Eco-Logic, Ted speaks with William Boyd, Michael J. Klein Chair, Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law, and Professor at UCLA's Institute of the Environment and Sustainability. He is also a Faculty Co-Director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, and Project Lead for the Governors' Climate and Forests Task Force (GCF).William and Ted discuss his background, growing up in South Carolina. He received his B.A. from University of North Carolina, his M.A. and Ph.D. from UC Berkeley's Energy and Resources Group, and his J.D. from Stanford Law School. He then moved to Washington D.C. and worked for the World Resources Institute, and was previously a Professor of Law and a John H. Schultz Energy Law Fellow at University of Colorado Boulder School of Law. His primary research and teaching interests are in energy law and regulation, climate change law and policy, and environmental law. He continues to be actively involved in climate, energy, and environmental policy matters at multiple levels of governance. Since 2009, he has served as the Project Lead for the Governors' Climate and Forests Task Force (GCF), a unique subnational collaboration of 38 states and provinces from Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Indonesia, Ivory Coast, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, Spain, and the United States that is working to develop regulatory frameworks to reduce emissions from deforestation and land use. Boyd is also the founding Director of the Laboratory for Energy & Environmental Policy innovation (LEEP), a policy innovation lab based in Boulder, Colorado that works with partners around the world to develop and support real-time policy experiments, establish robust networks for learning and exchange, and contribute to effective and durable policy outcomes.

Climate-related court cases around the world are growing fast, and on Thursday the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) together with the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, highlighted the trend in their new Global Climate Litigation Report. Andrew Raine, Head of the Frontiers in Environmental Law Unit of UNEP, spoke to UN News's Anton Uspensky about the report's findings, which show cases are surging in the Global South with human rights emerging as a powerful driver behind climate litigation. 

The last several years have seen a big increase in the number of lawsuits focused on the climate crisis. Some lawsuits challenge governments for their support for fossil fuels and for their failure to take climate action, while other cases target the fossil fuel companies themselves for knowingly misleading the world about the climate disrupting impacts of burning their products. Some of these cases seek monetary damages, others seek to hold governments accountable to their emissions reduction pledges. As more of these cases get their time in court, how powerful can litigation be in forcing action around the climate emergency? Guests: Delta Merner, Lead Scientist, Science Hub for Climate Litigation, Union of Concerned Scientists Korey Silverman-Roati, Senior Fellow, Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia Law School Lucy Maxwell, Co-Director, Climate Litigation Network, Urgenda Foundation For show notes and related links, visit https://www.climateone.org/watch-and-listen/podcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The last several years have seen a big increase in the number of lawsuits focused on the climate crisis. Some lawsuits challenge governments for their support for fossil fuels and for their failure to take climate action, while other cases target the fossil fuel companies themselves for knowingly misleading the world about the climate disrupting impacts of burning their products. Some of these cases seek monetary damages, others seek to hold governments accountable to their emissions reduction pledges. As more of these cases get their time in court, how powerful can litigation be in forcing action around the climate emergency? Guests: Delta Merner, Lead Scientist, Science Hub for Climate Litigation, Union of Concerned Scientists Korey Silverman-Roati, Senior Fellow, Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia Law School Lucy Maxwell, Co-Director, Climate Litigation Network, Urgenda Foundation For show notes and related links, visit https://www.climateone.org/watch-and-listen/podcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Monday, 16 young plaintiffs—between the ages of 5 and 22—walked into a packed courtroom in Helena, Montana, to sue their government. At issue is a 1972 amendment to the state constitution guaranteeing that the “state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations.” 22-year-old Rikki Held and her co-plaintiffs allege that state officials violated that constitutional right. The case, Held v. Montana, now over a decade in the making, is truly historic—the first-ever constitutional climate lawsuit to reach trial in the United States.Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Michael Gerrard, founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at the Columbia Law School to talk through what's at stake in this landmark case. They discussed the origins of the trial, its potential ripple effects, and where Held v. Montana sits in the landscape of climate change litigation around the world. Other reading of interest:This climate newsletter from Annie Crabill at The EconomistSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The US isn't delivering on its pledges to reverse climate change. The Willow Project in Alaska, labelled by some as a “carbon bomb”, is a key example of that. But with global energy supply chains so massively disrupted by the war in Ukraine, are these kinds of projects justified? Michael Gerrard is the founder of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School. He joined Arthur Snell in the Bunker to discuss why pushing through new climate laws is so difficult.“We ARE NOT on the trajectory that we want to be.” – Michael Gerrard“The US climate commitments are not really legally binding.” – Michael Gerrard“The Supreme Court has become somewhat of an impediment.” – Michael Gerrard.“In the US there have been efforts going back to 2004 to hold oil and gas responsible for climate change.” – Michael Gerrard.www.patreon.com/bunkercast Written and presented by Arthur Snell Producer: Chris Jones. Audio production: Simon Williams. Group Editor: Andrew Harrison. Managing Editor: Jacob Jarvis. Music by Kenny Dickinson THE BUNKER is a Podmasters ProductionInstagram | Twitter Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The US isn't delivering on its pledges to reverse climate change. The Willow Project in Alaska, labelled by some as a “carbon bomb”, is a key example of that. But with global energy supply chains so massively disrupted by the war in Ukraine, are these kinds of projects justified? Michael Gerrard is the founder of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School. He joined Arthur Snell in the Bunker to discuss why pushing through new climate laws is so difficult. “We ARE NOT on the trajectory that we want to be.” – Michael Gerrard “The US climate commitments are not really legally binding.” – Michael Gerrard “The Supreme Court has become somewhat of an impediment.” – Michael Gerrard. “In the US there have been efforts going back to 2004 to hold oil and gas responsible for climate change.” – Michael Gerrard. www.patreon.com/bunkercast  Written and presented by Arthur Snell Producer: Chris Jones. Audio production: Simon Williams. Group Editor: Andrew Harrison. Managing Editor: Jacob Jarvis. Music by Kenny Dickinson THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Production Instagram | Twitter Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Michael Burger, executive director of Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, talks about the latest proposals from the Biden administration that would cap carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants to virtually eliminate them by 2040.

Changing climate brings new risks to infrastructure, and commonly these risks are shared with insurance companies. To control their risks, insurers need to understand and anticipate both the sources and characteristics of natural threats, and to collaborate with their clients – infrastructure owners and operators – to mitigate the risks of natural hazards. To open a window on the role of insurers in addressing climate risk, we talk with Martin Lockman, a research lawyer working at Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. Martin works at the intersection of climate-related threats to infrastructure, the insurance industry, and risk management.

Episode 57 - Tiffany takes us on a journey around the world from Colombia to France to the U.S. and back again. She tells us about her adoption, growing up bilingual in France, what it was like going to an international school, how she met her husband, and how they are raising their two children multilingually. So much wisdom in this episode! Tiffany works as a communications associate at The Sabin Center for Climate Change Law so I am delighted to have this episode come out on Earth Day 2023! I love Tiffany's message that we don't have to chose which parts of our identities to embrace, we can embrace them all and celebrate our rich cultural and linguistic diversity. To find out more about Tiffany, check out her blog MamanEarth and follow her on Instagram @Maman_Earth. You can find Heather on Instagram @thefutureisbilingual, on her website or by writing to her at TFIBPodcast@gmail.com.  If you enjoy this podcast, please let a rating on your favorite podcast app and a review here. You can also buy a coffee to help support the show :) --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/the-future-is-bilingual/support

Healthcare attorney Harry Nelson of Nelson Hardiman, discusses the first trial of Juul and Altria Group over the marketing of vaping products to young audiences.Michael Gerrard, founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School, discusses an upcoming trial where Montana kids are suing the state over climate change.June Grasso hosts.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

People displaced by climate change are not eligible for refugee status. But should countries extend any sort of legal protections to them? Our guest, Ama Francis, a climate displacement project strategist with the International Refugee Assistance Project and Columbia Law School's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, thinks so. In this episode, we discuss some small ongoing initiatives and what new legal pathways might look like. 

Building codes: they might sound boring, but they're actually the front lines in a nationwide battle to decarbonize our buildings. And they do a lot more than keeping your  home from falling down over your head. They regulate everything from energy efficiency, to the kind of fuel your stove runs on, to whether your building has an electric vehicle charging port – all super important facets of building decarbonization. And if designed correctly, building codes can also help address issues like public health, pollution, and even adaptation to the effects of climate change. In this episode, Melissa speaks with Michael Gerrard, an expert on environment and climate law and director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University about how to unlock this secret weapon – and what's getting in the way of greener building codes.  The Big Switch is produced by Columbia University's Center on Global Energy Policy in partnership with Post Script Media. This episode was produced by Alexandria Herr and Daniel Woldorff. Theme music and mixing by Sean Marquand. Story editing by Anne Bailey. A special thanks to Natalie Volk, Kirsten Smith and Kyu Lee. Our executive editor is Stephen Lacey.

In a 6-3 decision in West Virginia v. EPA, Supreme Court justices determined that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) overstepped its authority in regulating carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Since the Thursday decision, several environmental groups have called the monumental ruling devastating to the Biden administration's efforts to facilitate a clean energy transition.  For a breakdown of the decision and its implications for climate regulations moving forward, host Bill Loveless spoke with legal experts Michael Gerrard and Jeff Holmstead.  Michael is founder and director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. He has pioneered innovative legal strategies and teaches courses on environmental law, climate change law and energy regulation. Before his time at Columbia, Michael was the head of the New York law office of Arnold & Porter. Jeff heads the Environmental Strategies Group at the law firm Bracewell. He previously served as assistant administrator for air and radiation at the EPA under President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2005. During his tenure, he was one of the architects behind the Clean Air Interstate Rule, the Clean Air Diesel Rule and the Mercury Rule for power plants. The pair discussed precisely how the rule curbs the EPA's power, where it stops short, and the kind of legal precedence it sets for future cases.

The Supreme Court is expected to release an opinion in the case West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency soon. Michael Gerrard, professor of law at Columbia Law School and the founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, previews what the case is about and the implications for combating climate change, especially if the court rules against the EPA.

A forthcoming Supreme Court decision could hamper some of the EPA's authority to curtail carbon emissions. On Today's Show:Michael Gerrard, professor of law at Columbia Law School and the founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, previews what the case is about and the implications for combating climate change, especially if the court rules against the EPA.

A forthcoming Supreme Court decision could hamper some of the EPA's authority to curtail carbon emissions. On Today's Show:Michael Gerrard, professor of law at Columbia Law School and the founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, previews what the case is about and the implications for combating climate change, especially if the court rules against the EPA.