State v. Reilly’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 7411 · 42 U.S.C. § 7607
Relies on Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Consolo v. Federal Maritime Commission · Kissinger v. Halperin · Small Refiner Lead Phase-Down Task Force v. United States Environmental Protection Agency
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“and that it violated principles of federalism. EPA subsequently abandoned the materials separation and battery burning provisions when it promulgated its final rules. See Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources; Municipal Waste Combustors, 56 Fed.Reg. 5488, 5496 (1991) (to be codified at 40 C.F.R. §§ 51, 52 and 60); Emissions Guidelines; Municipal Waste Combustors, 56 Fed.Reg. 5514, 5521 (1991) (to be codified at 40 C.F.R. § 60). II. A. The Separation Requirements 8 In determining the BDT for limiting harmful emissions, the EPA Administrator must”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. New York v. Reilly“42 U.S.C. § 7411(a)(1)(C). Because Congress did not assign the specific weight the Administrator should accord each of these factors, the Administrator is free to exercise his discretion in this area. See Center for Auto Safety v. Peck, 751 F.2d 1336 , 1342 (D.C.Cir.1985). We must therefore uphold EPA's decision to abandon the separation requirements if such action is supported on either air or nonair (including economic) grounds. 5 9 Under the CAA, promulgated rules must be accompanied by”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. New York v. Reilly“in arriving at its final conclusion regarding the economics of materials separation. Our review of the record demonstrates that several commenters supported EPA's economic predictions. See Summary of Public Comments and Responses, supra, at 4-55 to 4-56. Moreover, even if EPA's prediction did take into account the worst case scenario, its action would be permissible. This court has held that in applying a uniform standard to an industry, the standard must”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. New York v. Reilly
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.