The purpose of this Note is to examine the Supreme Court's reasoning in City of Chicago v. Environmental Defense Fund, and to explore the implications of the Court's decision. First, Section II of this Note delineates the relevant statutory and regulatory background concerning the regulation of municipal solid waste. Next, Section III presents the statement of the case. Finally, Section IV analyzes the Supreme Court's decision. Section IV(A) criticizes the Court's limited focus in interpreting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA). Section IV(B) contends that the Court's interpretation of RCRA is incorrect because it violates one of the express purposes of the Act. Section IV(C) argues that deference should have been given to the Environmental Protection Agency's interpretation of RCRA, in accordance with the standard set out in Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council.
"City of Chicago v. Environmental Defense Fund, Inc." Making the Case for Broader Application of Chevron, U.S.A. v. Natural Resource Defense Council,"
Akron Law Review: Vol. 28:
2, Article 8.
Available at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol28/iss2/8