...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Ecology law quarterly >Conflicting Enforcement Mechanisms Under RCRA: The Abstention Battleground Between State Agencies and Citizen Suits
【24h】

Conflicting Enforcement Mechanisms Under RCRA: The Abstention Battleground Between State Agencies and Citizen Suits

机译：RCRA下冲突的执法机制：国家机构与公民诉讼之间的弃权战场

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In enacting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Congress granted enforcement authority to the Environmental Protection Agency and state governments as well as to ordinary citizens under the citizen suit provision. These enforcement mechanisms often overlap and sometimes conflict, especially in circumstances of dual-track enforcements that occur simultaneously. Federal circuit courts rarely review such cases; however, three separate circuits recently addressed citizen suits in a manner that may significantly affect the balance between citizen and state enforcement under the statute. All three courts refused to dismiss citizen suits despite previously filed state agency actions. Each court also overturned lower court decisions to abstain from exercising federal jurisdiction that would have allowed state agencies to handle the matter in state court. This trend solidifies the power of the statute's citizen suit provision and may have tremendous implications on a state's ability to set and maintain its own waste disposal policy. This Note argues that courts must be mindful of the enforcement mechanisms set up by the statute and thus must leave open the opportunity for state agencies to foreclose dual-track enforcements to ensure that citizen suits do not supplant governmental action. In particular, state agencies should be able to maintain the ability to request that courts abstain from exercising jurisdiction over citizen suits in those cases in which the state agency is truly diligent in pursuing its own enforcement action. States can protect this option by enhancing the process for citizen input during enforcement policy decision making. In particular, states should require that agencies expand consideration of citizen perspectives before filing suit in agency enforcement actions.
机译：在颁布《资源保护和恢复法》时，国会根据公民诉讼规定，向环境保护局和州政府以及普通公民授予了执行权。这些执法机制经常重叠，有时会发生冲突，尤其是在同时发生的双轨执法情况下。联邦巡回法院很少审查此类案件；但是，最近有三个不同的巡回法庭以可能会严重影响法规中公民与国家执法之间的平衡的方式处理公民诉讼。尽管先前已提起国家机构的诉讼，但所有三个法院均拒绝驳回公民诉讼。每个法院还推翻了下级法院的决定，放弃了行使联邦管辖权的决定，该决定本可以允许州机构在州法院处理此事。这种趋势巩固了法规的公民诉讼条款的力量，并且可能对一个州制定和维护其自己的废物处置政策的能力产生巨大影响。本说明指出，法院必须注意法规所建立的执法机制，因此必须为国家机构留出机会阻止双重执法，以确保公民诉讼不会取代政府行动。特别是，在国家机构真正勤于执行自己的执法行动的情况下，国家机构应该能够维持要求法院放弃对公民诉讼行使管辖权的能力。各国可以通过在执法政策决策过程中加强公民的输入过程来保护这一选择。特别是，各州应要求各机构在对机构执法行动提起诉讼之前扩大对公民观点的考虑。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号