- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Louisiana
- /
- Rise St. James v. Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
Rise St. James v. Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
Geography
Year
2020
Document Type
Litigation
Part of
About this case
Filing year
2020
Status
Court issued written reasons for judgment reversing LDEQ decision to issue permits.
Geography
Docket number
694029
Court/admin entity
United States → State Courts → Louisiana District Court (La. Dist. Ct.)
Case category
Federal Statutory Claims (US) → Clean Air Act (US) → Environmentalist Lawsuits (US)
Principal law
United States → Clean Air Act (CAA)
At issue
Challenge to air permits for construction and operation of a new chemical manufacturing facility.
Topics
, ,
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
Beta
09/08/2022
Court issued written reasons for judgment reversing LDEQ decision to issue permits.
A Louisiana District Court vacated air permits for a new chemical manufacturing complex in St. James Parish in an area referred to as Louisiana’s “Industrial Corridor.” The court found that the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) violated the Clean Air Act, the agency’s duties under the Louisiana Constitution’s public trust doctrine, and statutory requirements to consider how the air permits would affect the St. James Parish master plan. The violations of the public trust doctrine included LDEQ’s failure to consider the negative consequences of the project’s 13.6 tons per year of greenhouse gas emissions in the agency’s balancing of costs and benefits. The court found that LDEQ could not rely on its finding that the facility would comply with applicable standards and emission controls as a reason for not considering the impacts of the project’s greenhouse gas emissions. The court also was not persuaded by LDEQ’s argument that it could not determine how a specific facility’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions would affect the physical environment. The court stated that “LDEQ’s public trustee duty does not require exactness” and that LDEQ was “not excused of its duty to evaluate the potential and real adverse impacts of [the applicant’s] greenhouse gases—especially given the enormity of the emissions—because it cannot quantify the exact impact at a specific place on Earth.” The court held that LDEQ “must take special care to consider the impact of climate-driven disasters fueled by greenhouse gases on environmental justice communities and their ability to recover.” The Advocate <a href="https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/article_45134bfe-3f3e-11ed-92f6-972d9a38216b.html">reported</a> that LDEQ and the applicant filed notices of appeal and asked the district court to suspend the ruling pending the outcome of the appeals.
Decision
11/05/2020
Brief filed by petitioners.
Brief
02/14/2020
Petition for judicial review filed.
Petition
Summary
Challenge to air permits for construction and operation of a new chemical manufacturing facility.
Topics mentioned most in this case Beta
See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more
Group
Topics
Target
Policy instrument
Risk
Impacted group
Just transition
Renewable energy
Fossil fuel
Greenhouse gas
Economic sector
Adaptation/resilience
Finance