Description: Challenge to CARB’s plan to implement AB 32.
-
Association of Irritated Residents v. California Air Resources Board
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 12/06/2011 Decision Decision issued. The court approved an expanded environmental analysis of alternatives to a cap and trade program for implementing AB 32. 05/23/2011 Notice of Appeal Appeal filed. On May 23, 2011, CARB appealed the order. 05/20/2011 Order Order issued. On May 20, 2011, a California state court issued an order holding that CARB must not take any additional steps to implement its greenhouse gas cap-and-trade program until it completes an adequate environmental analysis of the program. 03/18/2011 Order Order issued. A California state court issued an order enjoining the state from implementing its recently adopted GHG emissions cap-and-trade program pursuant to AB 32. A blog entry describing the decision and its effect is available here. 01/21/2011 Not Available Tentative ruling issued. A California Superior Court issued a tentative ruling setting aside CARB’s certification of the scoping plan for implementing AB 32. In its ruling, the court concluded that CARB failed to adequately consider alternatives to cap-and-trade and other climate programs under the law. The court rejected plaintiffs’ claims that the scoping plan failed to comply with the statutory requirements of A.B. 32 and that under CEQA, CARB was required to provide a detailed environmental analysis of each of the measures and programs prescribed by the scoping plan. However, the court accepted plaintiffs’ claims that the analysis CARB provided was lacking facts and data to support the agency’s conclusions in its environmental document. 06/10/2009 Petition for Writ of Mandate Petition for writ of mandate filed. Environmental justice advocates filed a lawsuit challenging the plan of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to implement the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (also known as AB 32). The complaint alleged that the plan failed to minimize greenhouse gas emissions and protect vulnerable communities as required by the Act. Plaintiffs also alleged that CARB violated CEQA in approving the plan. The complaint sought an injunction preventing implementation of the plan until CARB brought it into compliance with AB 32. -
Association of Irritated Residents v. California Air Resources Board
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 06/19/2012 Opinion Download Opinion issued. A California appellate court held that CARB did not violate the statutory requirements of the Global Warming Solutions Act, otherwise known as AB 32, in approving a strategy to implement the statute. In particular, the court held that CARB did not disregard the law or act arbitrarily or capriciously in adopting the scoping plan. 06/24/2011 Order Order issued. A California state appellate court granted CARB’s request for a stay of a May 2011 injunction that had stopped its work implementing the state’s cap-and-trade program. The court lifted the injunction imposed by the trial court following that court’s holding that CARB had not adequately weighed alternatives to the cap-and-trade system and other measures when it adopted a strategy to implement AB 32. [Editor’s note: Shortly after this decision was issued, CARB announced that it was nonetheless postponing the start of the cap-and-trade program by one year.] 06/03/2011 Order Order issued. The California Court of Appeal temporarily lifted the May 20 order enjoining the California Air Resources Board from taking steps to implement its AB 32 cap-and-trade program until opposition briefs could be filed. -
Association of Irritated Residents v. California Air Resources Board
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 09/28/2011 Order Petition for review and application for stay denied. On September 28, 2011, the California Supreme Court rejected the petition by plaintiffs to grant a temporary stay of CARB’s implementation of AB 32 pending the plaintiffs’ appeal of the June 2011 decision. Thus the program may go into effect. 07/26/2011 Petition for Review Petition for review with request for stay filed. Environmental justice advocates filed a petition with the California Supreme Court seeking to prevent CARB from continuing to implement its GHG cap-and-trade program. The petitioners are requesting that the court review an appellate court decision that allowed the program to proceed after a trial court injunction had blocked its implementation, and claim that the appellate court erred when it stayed enforcement of the injunction pending the state’s appeal of the trial court’s decision.