͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
͏
[ [link removed] ]Dream.org logo: a purple letter D and an orange letter O intersecting
John,
If you only have 30 seconds, read this:
When the experts in the room are no longer allowed to make critical
decisions in their areas of expertise, our climate is most at risk.
Unfortunately, this might just become our reality. An important historical
doctrine, known as “Chevron Deference”, is currently being challenged in
the Supreme Court.
[ [link removed] ]Learn About "Chevron Deference" & Its Effect On Our Climate
Chevron Deference allows agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to make informed decisions in their areas of expertise in court
cases, crucial for climate policy. Two cases now threaten to overturn it,
which could lead to less informed and potentially harmful decisions for
the environment.
[ [link removed] ]Check out our latest blog that offers a deeper understanding of the
Chevron Deference Review and what’s at stake for climate and climate
equity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have 2 minutes to spare, read this:
The Chevron Deference is a doctrine established in the 1984 Supreme Court
case Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, where the
Court allowed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to define what
“source” for a source of air pollution was under the Clean Air Act. The
precedent became a crucial legal framework that empowered agencies to
interpret laws in areas where they hold expertise. The Supreme Court would
accept the agency’s input as long as it was not unreasonable.
However, this important doctrine is under threat from two legal cases –
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of
Commerce. These cases aim to overturn Chevron Deference, which could
significantly impact how future environmental laws are implemented and
enforced.
While the Supreme Court must learn the details involved in cases presented
to them, they are not experts. It's the agency's responsibility to learn
the finer details, possess technical knowledge, engage with related
stakeholders, and implement the law. So in the event of an unprecedented
case where ambiguous issues arise, it’s best to refer to the
subject-matter experts rather than have a judge attempt to make a less
informed decision. Overturning Chevron Deference would leave future
climate rulings and regulations in ill-informed and often biased hands.
[ [link removed] ]To understand the full implications of what's at stake for our climate
and climate equity, we invite you to read our latest blog post.
Find Out Why the Supreme Court’s Chevron Doctrine Review Matters
We will continue to monitor these court cases closely and update you on
their outcomes and the broader implications for environmental policy and
the well-being of our planet.
In solidarity,
— Dream.Org
[ ] [ ]
[ [link removed] ]A purple letter D and an orange letter O intersecting above the word
Dream.org
Making dreams real – together
[ [link removed] ][IMG]
[ [link removed] ][IMG]
[ [link removed] ][IMG]
[ [link removed] ][IMG]
[ [link removed] ][IMG]
[ [link removed] ][IMG]
You can unsubscribe from this mailing list at any time:
[link removed]
Copyright © 2022 Dream.org
436 14th St, Suite 920
Oakland, CA 94612
