State of Wyoming v. United States Department of the Interior
United States District Court for the District of Wyoming
2017 WL 161428 (2017)
- Written by Robert Cane, JD
Facts
The United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (bureau) (defendant) had statutory authority to regulate natural-gas production under the Mineral Leasing Act. The bureau promulgated regulations regarding the reduction of the waste of natural gas from oil-and-gas production sites due to venting, flaring, and leaks. In its final rule, the bureau justified the costs of the regulations pertaining to the waste of natural gas by citing benefits of both the prevention of natural-gas waste and the protection of air quality. The bureau estimated that the new regulations would result in benefits of $209 to $403 million per year and costs of $110 to $279 million per year. Although most of the benefits were attributed to environmental benefits that reflected the methane-emissions reductions based on the social cost of methane, a smaller portion of the total benefits were attributed to costs savings from the recovery and sale of natural gas that was prevented from being wasted. The State of Wyoming (plaintiff) filed suit and challenged the final rule as an improper attempt by the bureau to regulate air pollution in excess of its statutory authority. Wyoming argued that the United States Congress delegated the authority to regulate air pollution to the United States Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) and the individual states under the Clean Air Act.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Skavdahl, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 905,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,100 briefs, keyed to 995 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.

