Join us.

We’re working to create a just society and preserve a healthy environment for future generations. Donate today to help.

Donate

Blog

Showing 36 results

Robert L. Glicksman

Professor of Law

Robert L. Glicksman is the J. B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Environmental Law at the George Washington University Law School.

Robert L. Glicksman | July 5, 2017

Murr v. Wisconsin: The ‘Whole Parcel’ Rule Prevails, At Least in This Regulatory Takings Case

Originally published by the George Washington Law Review How should a court assessing a regulatory takings claim define the “property” allegedly taken to assess the degree of the economic impact the regulation has on it? That question has plagued the Supreme Court for nearly a century, with different and conflicting answers emerging, sometimes in relatively rapid […]

Robert L. Glicksman | May 1, 2017

Trump’s Environmental Steamroller Bears Down on National Monuments

Donald Trump's antagonism toward environmental and natural resource protections seems to know no bounds, legal or otherwise. Among his latest targets are our national monuments, which include some of the most beautiful and historically, scientifically, culturally, and ecologically important tracts of federally owned lands. During the reign of destruction the president has unleashed in his […]

Robert L. Glicksman | March 2, 2017

No, They Don’t, Mr. Pruitt

In his first speech upon assuming his duties as EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt informed the agency’s employees that “regulators exist to give certainty to those that they regulate.” No, Mr. Pruitt, they do not. Regulators and the regulations they are responsible for adopting and enforcing exist to protect the public interest. In particular, they exist […]

Robert L. Glicksman | February 28, 2017

Congress Wants Land Agency to Ignore the Facts and Future

Imagine you come across a colleague sitting at his desk amid piles of yellowed papers. When you ask what he is working on, he says it’s his annual family budget. “What’s with all the old papers?” you might ask. “Oh,” he replies, “I always work my new budget off my receipts and bills from 1983, […]

Robert L. Glicksman | January 19, 2017

Ryan Zinke’s Troubling Road to Interior Secretary

Rep. Ryan Zinke, a congressman from Montana and Donald Trump’s pick for the next Secretary of the Interior, said some encouraging things in his Senate hearing on January 18. First, he acknowledged that the climate is changing and that “man has had an influence,” disavowing Trump’s notorious statement that climate change is a hoax. Second, […]

Robert L. Glicksman | June 28, 2016

Memo to the Next President: End the Era of Government Bashing

The most important lessons can be the hardest to learn. Sometimes they even take a crisis. We can hope that the sorry saga of Flint, Michigan’s lead-poisoned water will be such a teachable moment for at least some of the anti-government crowd, finally driving home the point that government has a vital role in protecting […]

Robert L. Glicksman | June 10, 2016

Navigating the Clean Water Act

Originally published by the George Washington Law Review The Supreme Court held in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co.1 that a determination by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) that the owners of land used for peat mining were obliged to apply to the Corps for a permit under the Clean […]

Robert L. Glicksman | April 21, 2016

Saving Endangered Species Requires a Systemic, Nationwide Approach

Yesterday, I joined four other witnesses in testifying about the Endangered Species Act (ESA) at a House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee hearing. Most of the witnesses and House members who attended focused on a variety of complaints about the ESA’s provisions governing listing and delisting of species and called for changes to the law […]

Robert L. Glicksman | July 6, 2015

The Implications of Michigan v. EPA for Regulation of Hazardous Air Pollutants and Beyond

The following post is based on an article by Professor Glicksman on the George Washington Law Review website.1 In Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency,2 Justice Scalia, for a 5-4 majority, held that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s failure to consider cost at the initial stage of deciding whether to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants […]