Insights on Environmental

Recently introduced bipartisan legislation aims to significantly streamline the environmental review process for recipients of federal assistance.

The Trump Administration has proposed implementing a broad range of regulatory changes in order to promote the development of artificial intelligence (AI) in the United States.

Within this term, the US Supreme Court’s major environmental and administrative focus was on statutory text in its environmental and administrative decisions.

On July 8, the US Supreme Court allowed President Trump’s executive order (EO) permitting Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)-related planning efforts for the Trump Administration’s restructuring of the federal workforce to move forward.

The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” — budget reconciliation bill signed into law on July 4 — and a new Executive Order (EO) have clarified that solar and wind generation.

For decades, California has been granted unique deference in setting Clean Air Act (CAA) emissions limitations for California-sold vehicles through use of a state-specific waiver.

Changes in presidential Administration often mean changes in policy priorities and budgeting, but a Maryland federal district court recently held that the executive branch’s ability to pivot on policy has limits.

US Supreme Court Clean Air Act (CAA) decisions often result in big-picture changes to administrative law. Two CAA decisions this term deal with CAA’s venue-related provisions which specify where cases challenging US Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) determinations can be filed.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is a federal statute that outlines how federal agencies must review the environmental impacts of their regulatory actions. The regulated community has often viewed NEPA as an obstacle to a broad range of federal actions in areas ranging from energy permitting to agriculture.

Partner J. Michael Showalter discussed the growing impact of artificial intelligence (AI)- driven data centers on energy demand and emissions.

ArentFox Schiff is pleased to announce that 69 attorneys were recognized as leaders in their field and 23 practices spanning the firm’s litigation, regulatory, and transactional capabilities were ranked in the 2025 edition of Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business.

“Energy security,” the principle that when you flip a light switch the lights will turn on, is something that most Americans take for granted. But the mechanics behind it incorporate both century-old transmission towers and the latest in renewable energy technology.

Shortly after taking office, President Trump froze funding already allocated to various parties, citing the Administration’s disapproval of issues including climate change and social equity. Additionally, executive agencies removed content discussing climate change from websites.

For decades, businesses have focused on “doing more with less,” maximizing efficiency by optimizing resources and streamlining processes to achieve greater output with fewer inputs. This effort often involves leveraging technology, improving productivity, and reducing waste to maintain or enhance performance.

For decades, regulators have tried to quantify harm related to emissions, including the “social cost of carbon” (SCC), but that approach has now changed. The Trump Administration recently released a memorandum seeking to discontinue regulatory use of SCC except as required by law.

The Illinois Commerce Commission staff (ICC Staff) announced recommendations laying the groundwater for Illinois’ first procurement of energy storage resources expected to occur this summer.

Partner J. Michael Showalter was quoted on the Trump Administration’s lawsuits testing the judiciary’s stance on federal interests in state affairs, particularly concerning state-led climate change initiatives.

In recent years, environmental nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and local governments have increasingly sued gas, oil, and energy companies, challenging their historic messaging on climate change, plastic recycling, and fossil fuels effects.

On April 22, the Trump Administration issued an Executive Order (EO) directing the US Department of Justice (DOJ) to begin to unwind “disparate impact” regulations that were established under federal civil rights laws. In the environmental context, the EO likely represents the functional end of some Biden Administration environmental justice (EJ) efforts.

Tennessee lawmakers are setting a new precedent in chemical regulation, including per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), by signing into law an industry-backed bill that requires the use of the “best science available” when developing rules governing PFAS and other chemicals.

According to an anonymous US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) employee, the agency is considering whether to propose a rule that would require the agency to reevaluate the health and environmental risks of certain chemicals, including per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

President Trump’s energy-focused ambitions will generate work for regulators at all levels of the government.

The California Senate Environmental Quality Committee passed California Senate Bill 682 aiming to ban the sale of products with intentionally added perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) unless deemed to have “essential uses” and without alternatives.

Public companies can face significant liability based on past operations. While most industrial companies have long-term experience evaluating potential remediation obligations imposed by laws such as the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, new legal theories and increased litigation from state and local governments heightens the potential for risk.

Government Relations Partner Elizabeth Horner will present on a panel titled “Drafting Legislation” in Washington, DC, on April 8, 2025, as part of a National Academies workshop.