Environmentally Speaking

Environmentally Speaking

Podcast host Clarice Parsons interviews Kerin Browning and Marisa Desautel, managing partners of Desautel Browning Law. They will leave you cracking up while discussing some serious topics around state / federal environmental law, utility / energy statutory and regulatory compliance, civil litigation, and municipal and regulatory zoning and permitting.

  1. 19 MAR

    EP 133: When Science Leaves the Bench: Climate Change, Courts, and Political Denial

    Podcast: Environmentally Speaking Host: Marisa Desautel Guest/Co-host: Clarice Parsons In this episode of Environmentally Speaking, Marissa Desautels and Clarice Parsons unpack a recent article raising concerns about the removal of climate change content from a scientific reference manual intended for judges. What starts as a reaction to a strange and troubling article quickly becomes a larger conversation about climate science denial, the role of expertise in the courtroom, and how recent changes in judicial deference may shift scientific decision-making away from agencies and toward judges. The conversation explores the legal, political, and practical consequences of sidelining climate science in judicial and regulatory spaces. Marissa and Clarice question whether static reference materials can ever substitute for expert testimony, especially in fields like climate science that evolve rapidly. They also connect the issue to the Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision, arguing that reducing deference to agencies may not eliminate bias, but instead transfer power to judges who may lack technical expertise. What the judges’ reference manual on scientific evidence appears to be Why removing climate change material from that manual is so concerning How the issue relates to the Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision Why agency expertise still matters in environmental decision-making The limits of judges and reference manuals in evaluating evolving science How climate denial continues to shape policy and public discourse Why symbolic climate commitments often fall short of meaningful action A broader question: what can actually be done when consensus is no longer realistic? Email: marisa@desautelbrowning.com Phone: 401-477-0023 Website: desautelbrowning.com Reference:  https://earth.org/political-attack-scientists-condemn-removal-of-climate-chapter-from-us-judges-reference-manual/

    18 min
  2. 6 MAR

    EP 132: The Endangerment Finding, Explained

    Podcast: Environmentally Speaking Host: Marisa Desautel Guest/Co-host: Clarice Parsons In this episode of Environmentally Speaking, Marisa Desautel and Clarice Parsons unpack the federal EPA’s rescission of the 2009 “endangerment finding,” a policy determination that has shaped greenhouse gas regulation for the past 16 years. They break down what the finding is, why its rollback matters, and how recent shifts in judicial thinking about agency authority may have opened the door to broader deregulatory action. The conversation explores the legal, environmental, and practical consequences of the rescission, from weakened climate oversight to uncertainty for industries and regulators. Marisa also reflects on how state programs, corporate compliance, and everyday consumer experiences, like start-stop car technology, may be affected by changing federal policy. What the EPA’s “endangerment finding” actually is Why the February 12 rescission is such a major development How the Clean Air Act has been used to regulate greenhouse gases The legal backdrop of recent Supreme Court limits on agency power Why rescinding non-statutory policy findings may be easier than undoing formal regulations The risks of deregulation for climate policy, air quality, and public health What this could mean for future agency rollbacks beyond the EPA A real-world example: start-stop technology in newer vehicles The endangerment finding was a 2009 EPA scientific determination that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare, giving the agency a basis to regulate emissions from sources like cars and trucks. Because the finding was not written into statute or formalized as a regulation, Marisa explains that it may have been especially vulnerable to rescission. The episode frames the rollback as part of a broader legal and political shift, especially after recent Supreme Court decisions limiting how much discretion federal agencies can exercise without explicit statutory authority. Marisa argues that the rescission is environmentally harmful and warns that it could signal wider efforts to dismantle non-statutory federal programs across agencies. The discussion also highlights uncertainty: litigation could reverse the move, industries may face inconsistent compliance expectations, and states may need to reassess how their own programs interact with federal changes. Email: Marissa@desautelbrowning.com Phone: 401-477-0023 Website: desautelbrowning.com Reference: President Trump and Administrator Zeldin Deliver Single Largest Deregulatory Action in U.S. History | US EPA

    22 min

Acerca de

Podcast host Clarice Parsons interviews Kerin Browning and Marisa Desautel, managing partners of Desautel Browning Law. They will leave you cracking up while discussing some serious topics around state / federal environmental law, utility / energy statutory and regulatory compliance, civil litigation, and municipal and regulatory zoning and permitting.

También te podría interesar