Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Arizona Public Service Company v. Environmental Protection Agency

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
211 F.3d 1280 (D.C. Cir. 2001)


Facts

In 1990, Congress passed amendments to the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401 et seq., that granted Indian tribes the same power to regulate air quality on their reservation lands as states had on state lands. This included the power to create implementation plans aimed at ensuring that air quality met national standards, the ability to designate land to comply with certain standards, and the ability to create a permitting program for potential air polluters. Shortly afterward, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (defendant) proposed rules implementing the amendments. The EPA determined that the amendments were a delegation of federal authority to the Indian Tribes that permitted the tribes to regulate all air quality within the boundaries of the reservation. The EPA further determined that reservation lands included lands held in trusts. These proposed rules were ultimately adopted as the final Tribal Authority Rule. Arizona Public Service Company (plaintiff) challenged the adoption of the Tribal Authority Rule on two grounds. First, it argued that Congress did not delegate to Indian tribes the authority to regulate air quality on lands held by nonmembers within a reservation. Second, it argued that Congress did not mean for the term “reservation” to include trust lands.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Edwards, C.J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Ginsburg, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 176,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.