About Top 10
Each year, the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law publishes 10 articles that are considered the “Top 10” most pressing environmental law issues of the year. These articles are co-authored by 10 of our Senior Staff Editors and their selected VLGS faculty member. Senior Staff Editors typically select a faculty member that has extensive knowledge or experience in the field they are looking to write about. Over the course of the fall semester, Senior Staff Editors and their faculty co-author will meet and draft an article incorporating the anticipated effects of a particular environmental issue as well as providing creative solutions to that issue. Through this collaborative writing assignment, students have the opportunity to further refine their writing and researching skills. This publication serves as a vital resource for practitioners, policymakers, and academics navigating the rapidly evolving field of environmental law.
NEPA Without CEQ: Environmental Review Under Trump and Seven County
VJEL Senior Staff Editor: Benjamin Behimer
VLGS Faculty Co-Author: Christophe Courchesne
NEPA Without CEQ explains how 2025’s twin shocks to NEPA implementation—the rescission of CEQ’s government-wide regulations and the Supreme Court’s Seven County decision—reshape what environmental review and litigation will look like going forward. It traces NEPA’s statutory purpose, then shows how agencies and practitioners must now rely on NEPA’s text, agency-specific rules, and evolving guidance in the absence of enforceable CEQ regulations. The piece describes how Seven County entrenches a highly deferential, purely procedural vision of NEPA and, in most cases, does not require agencies to analyze upstream and downstream effects. It closes by identifying the key doctrinal pressure points that may come to define NEPA disputes in the post-CEQ and Seven County landscape.
The Night the Lights Will Go Out in Georgia: Regulatory Action Is Needed to Protect Communities From Footing the Bill of Data Centers’ Energy Demands
VJEL Senior Staff Editor: Cassidy McMann
VLGS Faculty Co-Author: Dr. Guanchi Zhang
Georgia is home to the fastest growing data center industry in the nation. Fueled by the recent A.I. boom, data centers are popping up all over the state, accompanied by promises to bring new tax revenue and jobs. However, data centers require 24/7 power, and there currently is not enough electricity to meet this new demand. Costs associated with adding new load to the grid can be passed onto residential customers. State and local regulators need to take action to ensure utility companies are not passing costs onto residents, and instead holding data center owners responsible.
Rage Against the Wind: The Markets Won’t Do What the OBBB Tells Them
VJEL Senior Staff Editor: Emily Dwight
VLGS Faculty Co-Author: Professor Mark James
In their article Rage Against the Wind, authors Mark James (LLM’16) and Emily Dwight (JD/MERL’26) analyze the legal and economic implications of the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBB), arguing that it uses a manufactured “national energy emergency” to dismantle critical renewable energy incentives. The piece critiques the administration's pivot toward energy favoritism, detailing how the OBBB abandons technology neutrality by imposing complex foreign-content requirements and accelerated deadlines specifically designed to stifle wind and solar deployment. By comparing current federal policy to a “quixotic” personal crusade, the authors illustrate a growing disconnect between ideological governance and the market realities of the clean energy transition. Ultimately, the article warns that these regulatory hurdles may irretrievably squander America’s economic advantages while simultaneously failing to address the very grid reliability concerns they claim to solve.
Rescinding the Endangerment Finding
VJEL Editor-in-Chief: Kelli Cigelnik
VLGS Faculty Co-Author: Professor Pat Parenteau
The EPA has proposed a rescission of the 2009 Endangerment Finding, a move that would dismantle the legal foundation for federal greenhouse gas regulation under the Clean Air Act. The proposal conflicts with binding Supreme Court precedent in Massachusetts v. EPA, misapplies the major questions doctrine, and relies on a legally impermissible de minimis theory that contradicts the statute’s mandatory public health framework. A rescission would destabilize reliance interests, fragment climate regulation, and permanently constrain federal climate authority absent congressional action. The fate of the Endangerment Finding will test the limits of administrative power, the durability of science-based rulemaking, and the rule of law itself.
Environmental Destruction Through Deregulation
VJEL Senior Staff Editor: Eric Grimes
VLGS Faculty Co-Author: Rachel Westrate
The second Trump Administration’s aggressive deregulatory agenda is dismantling decades of bipartisan environmental protections and undermining the federal government’s ability to safeguard public health and the environment. After tracing the historically bipartisan roots of U.S. environmental law, the authors detail how the Administration is rolling back or bypassing key regulations through agency action, litigation strategies, and severe defunding, particularly within the EPA. These actions will lead to immediate increases in pollution and long-term institutional damage by weakening regulatory capacity and expertise. Sustained resistance by states, courts, and civil society will be essential to slow or mitigate the environmental harm caused by this sweeping deregulation.
Superfund Climate Acts Under Threat: Implications for States
VJEL Senior Staff Editor: Emily Karwacki
VLGS Faculty Co-Author: Professor Kirt Mayland
Vermont and New York recently passed Climate Superfund Acts. Primarily, the Acts would require fossil fuel companies that produced over a set amount of emissions to pay the states in proportion with those emissions so the states can implement climate change adaptation measures to protect their residents. The US government, several states, and several industry groups have sued Vermont and New York claiming the Acts are unconstitutional and must be struck down. While the cases are ongoing, it is likely one or both will reach the Supreme Court to determine if the Acts' reliance on the Superfund framework is enough to finally force fossil fuel companies to pay for the damage their products have caused. This piece examines the ongoing litigation and discusses the impacts of upholding or striking down the Acts.
Balancing the Conservation Checkbook: How the Federal Government is Quietly Risking America’s Soil
VJEL Senior Staff Editor: Julia Wickham
VLGS Faculty Co-Author: Professor Jonathan Coppess
U.S. agricultural policy is once again prioritizing short-term production incentives at the expense of long-term environmental stewardship, risking severe consequences for soil, water, and climate. Drawing lessons from the 1920s and the 1970s, conservation programs, like the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), were designed to counteract the environmental harms of overproduction. Recent policy choices, including the rescission of Inflation Reduction Act conservation funding, use of the Commodity Credit Corporation Section 5 authority, and uncertainty surrounding CRP, are undermining decades of conservation investment.
Roads Not Taken: The Trump Administration’s Roadless Rule Reversal
VJEL Senior Staff Editor: Drew Collins
VLGS Faculty Co-Author: Professor Ross Jones
This article examines the history, purpose, and significance of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule, which has protected nearly 59 million acres of national forest land from road construction and logging for over two decades. It analyzes the Trump Administration’s 2025 effort to rescind the Rule, situating the decision within broader deregulatory, timber production, and wildfire management initiatives. The piece also explores the overwhelming public opposition to the rescission, the legal constraints imposed by administrative law, and the potential for judicial review. Ultimately, it considers what is at stake environmentally and procedurally as the USDA moves toward a final decision on rescinding the Rule.
Climate Negotiation and Litigation with the International Court of Justice and Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ 2025 Advisory Opinions
VJEL Senior Staff Editor: Ilinca Johnson
VLGS Faculty Co-Author: Professor Beatrice Hamilton
How do international and regional courts construe human rights in the climate emergency? This Article examines the two 2025 Advisory Opinions from the International Court of Justice and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. These complementary opinions effectively defined and narrowed discussion on climate change by articulating standards for addressing human rights in the climate emergency and state responsibilities that will certainly influence future diplomatic efforts and litigation on climate change.
Ending Suburban Sprawl As A Climate Solution: New Paths Forward For Sustainable Development
VJEL Senior Staff Editor: Joseph Lepak
VLGS Faculty Co-Author: Professor Dayna Smith
Ending suburban sprawl through denser, smarter zoning reform is a critical climate solution that can also address the housing crisis. Low-density, car-dependent development drives higher emissions, resource use, and habitat loss, while compact, transit-oriented development reduces per-person environmental impacts and infrastructure costs. Reviewing recent state reforms in places like Minneapolis, Oregon, Massachusetts, California, and Vermont, the authors show that broad deregulation alone is insufficient and can undermine environmental protections. Vermont’s geographically targeted zoning model is a promising path forward. It encourages development in already-built areas while strengthening protections for undeveloped land to balance sustainability, housing needs, and social justice