Flaster Greenberg shareholder Daniel Markind authored a New York Law Journal article examining two recent federal court decisions that struck down New York's Climate Change Superfund Act, finding it preempted by federal law and raising significant questions about the limits of state authority in regulating national energy policy.
Titled"Two Federal Judges Sink New York's Version of the Superfund Law," the article analyzes decisions issued by Judge P. Kevin Castel of the Southern District of New York and Judge Brenda Sannes of the Northern District of New York, both of whom concluded that New York's climate liability law conflicts with the federal Clean Air Act. The law sought to require major fossil fuel companies to pay $75 billion over 25 years to fund climate-related projects throughout New York.
Markind explores the broader legal challenges brought by the federal government, a coalition of 22 states and industry groups, which argued that the law violated constitutional principles including the Supremacy Clause and improperly attempted to regulate matters of national energy policy. He also examines New York's evolving and often contradictory approach to energy development, highlighting issues surrounding pipeline infrastructure, environmental regulation and the state's ongoing need for reliable energy sources.
The article concludes by noting that the outcome of these cases could have implications far beyond New York, influencing the extent to which states may regulate and impose liability on companies operating across state and international borders.
Read the full NYLJ article here.
