ABSTRACT
The author uses four Clean Air Act case studies to examine state behaviors related to four types of states. First, Massachusetts v. EPA (2007) highlights progressive states as aggressors in national-state conflict, where a group of states sued the EPA to force national regulation of GHGs. Second, in a continuation of the story, Texas’s refusal to comply with and implement GHG permits illustrates how regressive states also play the role as aggressor as they attempt to derail national environmental protection efforts. Third, North Carolina’s experience with the “good neighbor” provision serves as an example of struggler states seeking cooperative relationships with the national government but resorting to conflict and legal tactics when that fails. Finally, threats by the EPA to invoke the “general duties” clause shows the subtle political battles that occur as delayer states try to avoid conflict while holding onto the status quo. Case studies indicate there are different patterns of environmental federalism across different types of states.
