ABSTRACT
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is an oddball among federal environmental laws in more ways than one, but among its most prominent distinctions is the approach it takes to federal–state relations. Many federal environmental laws are held out as examples of “cooperative federalism,” under which the federal legislation provides many opportunities for states to implement national goals and standards through state-run programs. Under this model of federal–state relations, if a state program satisfies prescribed federal policy criteria, the state receives some institutional benefit in return, ranging anywhere from funding to virtually complete responsibility for implementation and enforcement of a federal statute. Although debate rages over the best recipe, there is widespread agreement that the successes of federal environmental law over the past 40 years owe much to its strong taste for cooperative federalism. Despite appearances, however, and notwithstanding its strong influence over state and local land-use decisions, the ESA is not an example of this approach.
