Oregon Law Review : Vol.102, No.1 (2023)
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Browsing Oregon Law Review : Vol.102, No.1 (2023) by Subject "Climate change"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access Lest We Be Lemmings(University of Oregon School of Law, 2024-05-20) Osborn-Wright, ClaireThis Article explains why the Ninth Circuit’s opinion that the Juliana plaintiffs do not possess standing to obtain their requested declaratory judgment is incorrect. Part I addresses the knowledge of climate scientists, the U.S. government, and the fossil fuel industry, of the existence, causes, and effects of global warming. Part II discusses the U.S. government’s failure to regulate the fossil fuel industry, reduce federal subsidies to the industry, and hold the industry accountable for global warming. Part III explains the fossil fuel industry’s strategy for denying responsibility for global warming. Part IV discusses the opinions of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon and Ninth Circuit in the case of Juliana v. United States. Part V explains the many reasons why the Ninth Circuit’s opinion that the plaintiffs do not possess standing to obtain a declaratory judgment is incorrect.Item Open Access Reducing Oregon’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Prioritizing Hydropower and Energy Equity for All Oregonians(University of Oregon School of Law, 2024-05-20) Lowe, DylanOregon created some of the most ambitious carbon-neutral goals of any state in the country. However, Oregon failed to achieve meaningful results in curbing greenhouse gas emissions. This Comment’s thesis states that Oregon’s policies on climate change will continue to have two effects. First, the policies will likely not reduce greenhouse gas emissions, ruling the policies ineffective. Second, the policies will increase energy costs with inequitable effects on communities of color, rural communities, and the unhoused population of Oregon.