46
New Articles
On March 6, 2024, the SEC issued its long-awaited climate disclosure rule, which mandates the disclosure of climate-related risks and Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions, among other things. The rule was immediately challenged from both conservative and liberal perspectives, including by coalitions of various states. These assorted challenges were consolidated for review in the Eighth Circuit (selected by lottery), which is generally considered to be a conservative court. On April 4, 2024, the SEC voluntarily stayed the climate disclosure rule pending judicial review while maintaining that the SEC would “continue [to] vigorously defend[] the [mandatory climate disclosure rule’s] validity in court.”
Recently, a Texas federal court denied a motion to dismiss in an ERISA lawsuit featuring allegations that an employer’s 401(k) plan breached its fiduciary duty by utilizing an investment manager who pursued ESG objectives rather than exclusively focusing on maximizing financial benefits. Although only a single decision (and one from a conservative court), this decision could have a significant impact due to the recent proliferation of lawsuits alleging violations of fiduciary duty based upon a supposed adherence to ESG factors rather than financial ones, and could indeed inspire future lawsuits featuring similar allegations.
On April 9, 2024, the European Court of Human Rights issued a decision holding that Switzerland violated the human rights of its citizens by failing to adequately protect them from climate change. Significantly, a failure to take adequate steps to combat climate change has now been held to constitute a human rights violation. Even though the European Court of Human Rights recognized that governments need a degree of flexibility in achieving the goal of combatting climate change, it seems likely that this decision will inspire similar lawsuits seeking to compel governments to take action.
Sign Up for e-NewsBulletins
You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review’s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.
Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com intended to be a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional. NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us.
Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.
The National Law Review – National Law Forum LLC 3 Grant Square #141 Hinsdale, IL 60521 Telephone (708) 357-3317 or toll free (877) 357-3317. If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.
Copyright ©2024 National Law Forum, LLC
On March 6, 2024, the SEC issued its long-awaited climate disclosure rule, which mandates the disclosure of climate-related risks and Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions, among other things. The rule was immediately challenged from both conservative and liberal perspectives, including by coalitions of various states. These assorted challenges were consolidated for review in the Eighth Circuit (selected by lottery), which is generally considered to be a conservative court. On April 4, 2024, the SEC voluntarily stayed the climate disclosure rule pending judicial review while maintaining that the SEC would “continue [to] vigorously defend[] the [mandatory climate disclosure rule’s] validity in court.”
Recently, a Texas federal court denied a motion to dismiss in an ERISA lawsuit featuring allegations that an employer’s 401(k) plan breached its fiduciary duty by utilizing an investment manager who pursued ESG objectives rather than exclusively focusing on maximizing financial benefits. Although only a single decision (and one from a conservative court), this decision could have a significant impact due to the recent proliferation of lawsuits alleging violations of fiduciary duty based upon a supposed adherence to ESG factors rather than financial ones, and could indeed inspire future lawsuits featuring similar allegations.
On April 9, 2024, the European Court of Human Rights issued a decision holding that Switzerland violated the human rights of its citizens by failing to adequately protect them from climate change. Significantly, a failure to take adequate steps to combat climate change has now been held to constitute a human rights violation. Even though the European Court of Human Rights recognized that governments need a degree of flexibility in achieving the goal of combatting climate change, it seems likely that this decision will inspire similar lawsuits seeking to compel governments to take action.
Sign Up for e-NewsBulletins
You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review’s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.
Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com intended to be a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional. NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us.
Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.
The National Law Review – National Law Forum LLC 3 Grant Square #141 Hinsdale, IL 60521 Telephone (708) 357-3317 or toll free (877) 357-3317. If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.
Copyright ©2024 National Law Forum, LLC
Related
Related posts:
- Recent New Jersey Environmental Case Law: An Overview | New Jersey Law Journal – Law.com
- Con Edison updates clean energy progress in annual sustainability report – Daily Energy Insider
- Congressional Republicans Seek to Overturn SEC Mandatory Climate Disclosure Rule – The National Law Review
- Natural Resources, Energy, and Environmental Law | Colorado Law – University of Colorado Boulder
Powered by YARPP.