Federal pollution law rests on Commerce Clause because courts cannot handle modern nuisance cases

Evidence

The modern pollution control laws seek, in effect, to answer questions regarding allowable pollution levels that were once largely addressed by courts in common law nuisance litigation, but which now elude the institutional competency of courts in the more technologically and economically complex modern society. Because, however, the federal government does not possess the general police powers of a state, Congress and the EPA must instead rely principally on expansive notions of congressional authority under the Commerce Clause to regulate “channels” of interstate commerce and “economic activities” substantially affecting interstate commerce to justify federal pollution controls. — Richard J. Lazarus, The Making of Environmental Law, 782

Categorization

• XREF: Pays off the polyad’s institutional-tensions thread — federal environmental law resting awkwardly on commerce rationale links directly to Eco-Justice discourse on federalism. — connects to: Public nuisance is unreasonable interference with a common public right — Richard J. Lazarus, The Making of Environmental Law, 781; Federal environmental law rests awkwardly on a commerce rationale foreign to its aims — Richard J. Lazarus, The Making of Environmental Law, 195; The dormant Commerce Clause bars states from protecting ecosystems against out-of-state harms — Richard J. Lazarus, The Making of Environmental Law, 198 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Environmental statutes regulate commerce without pursuing commercial aims. #expands (0.85) — Richard J. Lazarus, The Making of Environmental Law, 900
• Federalist Society federalism opposes the deliberately national structure of pollution statutes #qualifies (0.75) — Richard J. Lazarus, The Making of Environmental Law, 538