Search

The federal government has grown very aggressive in asserting preemption of state laws. In the context of climate, this issue is playing out in the realm of mobile sources and could come to the fore in the regulation of stationary sources. In this Essay, I argue that the principles underlying Chevron—political accountability and technical expertise—counsel respectful attention to the role of state executive agencies in issuing rules alleged to be preempted by federal law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article challenges the prevailing view that state action on climate change is misconceived because it cannot meaningfully impact greenhouse gas emissions. We argue that inducing technological change provides an independent ground for state programs; one can think globally and still, act locally. Technological innovation is essential to successful climate policy and subject to a distinct market failure—technology spillovers that undermine investment incentives. State action can significantly enhance technological change, as promoting innovation is less dependent on large-scale government action and its inherent uncertainties favor the diversity sustained by multiple state programs. These observations suggest a two-tiered strategy: primary federal responsibility for reducing greenhouse gas emissions while state policies focus on promoting technological change. This Article concludes by proposing measures designed to support this complementary federal-state framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]