Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corp. (original) (raw)

dbo:abstract

Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corporation, 549 U.S. 561 (2007), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that while a term may be used more than once in a statute, an agency has the discretion to interpret each use of the term in a different way based on the context. In a unanimous decision, the court held in favor of the plaintiff's (Environmental Defense) argument. This case addressed the Clean Air Act (CAA) and two of its programs, Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and New Source Performance Standard (NSPS). PSD applies to regulating annual emissions; NSPS pertains to regulating hourly emissions. Each section of the Clean Air Act, that outlines the provisions of the PSD and the NSPS, defines "modification" differently. As a result, the inconsistency of the term "modification" in the CAA becomes the main debate of the case and the main argument for both the plaintiffs and defendants. (en)

dbo:wikiPageExternalLink

dbo:wikiPageID

35197331 (xsd:integer)

dbo:wikiPageLength

19361 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)

dbo:wikiPageRevisionID

1104907016 (xsd:integer)

dbo:wikiPageWikiLink

dbp:arguedate

0001-11-01 (xsd:gMonthDay)

dbp:argueyear

2006 (xsd:integer)

dbp:case

Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corporation, 549 U.S. 561 (en)

dbp:concurrence

Thomas (en)

dbp:cornell

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/05-848.ZS.html

dbp:courtlistener

https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/145748/environmental-defense-v-duke-energy-corporation/

dbp:decidedate

0001-04-02 (xsd:gMonthDay)

dbp:decideyear

2007 (xsd:integer)

dbp:docket

5 (xsd:integer)

dbp:fullname

Environmental Defense, et al., Petitioners v. Duke Energy Corporation, et al. (en)

dbp:googlescholar

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case%3Fcase=56741129475832634

dbp:holding

The interpretation of a "modification" in the Clean Air Act, in regards to Prevention of Significant Deterioration and New Source Performance Standard, does not require the same regulatory implementation. (en)

dbp:joinmajority

Roberts, Stevens, Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito; Thomas (en)

dbp:justia

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/549/561/

dbp:litigants

Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corporation (en)

dbp:majority

Souter (en)

dbp:otherSource

Supreme Court (en)

dbp:otherUrl

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-848.pdf

dbp:oyez

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2006/05-848

dbp:parallelcitations

172800.0

dbp:prior

On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (en)

dbp:uspage

561 (xsd:integer)

dbp:usvol

549 (xsd:integer)

dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate

dcterms:subject

rdf:type

rdfs:comment

Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corporation, 549 U.S. 561 (2007), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that while a term may be used more than once in a statute, an agency has the discretion to interpret each use of the term in a different way based on the context. In a unanimous decision, the court held in favor of the plaintiff's (Environmental Defense) argument. (en)

rdfs:label

Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corp. (en)

owl:sameAs

prov:wasDerivedFrom

wikipedia-en:Environmental_Defense_v._Duke_Energy_Corp.?oldid=1104907016&ns=0

foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf

wikipedia-en:Environmental_Defense_v._Duke_Energy_Corp.

foaf:name

Environmental Defense, et al., Petitioners v. Duke Energy Corporation, et al. (en)

is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of

is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of

is foaf:primaryTopic of

wikipedia-en:Environmental_Defense_v._Duke_Energy_Corp.