Oral Argument on Cap-and-Trade Appeal Likely Due by Fall
Neither lawsuit challenged any of the provisions of AB 32 nor the merits of climate change science. The only issue addressed in the litigation is the portion of CARB’s regulatory program that seeks to permit the Board to allocate to itself GHG emissions allowances and to profit by selling them to GHG emitters.
The Superior Court judge denied the petitions on November 12, 2013. Both PLF and CalChamber appealed the decision on October 17, 2014, with the 3rd District Court of Appeal in Sacramento. The state’s reply brief (CARB, CA Attorney General) was due February 2, 2015, however, the state missed the deadline and was been given an additional 15 days to file its response. Thereafter, appellants reply briefs were filed on March 20, 2015.
In addition to the briefs by the named parties, at least three Amicus Curie, or "Friend of the Court", briefs (Amicus Briefs) were filed in support of the PLF and CalChamber appeals on May 15, 2015. Filed on May 15, 2015, by the California Manufacturers & Technology Association (CMTA), the California Taxpayers Association (CalTax) and the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), all the Amicus Briefs contest the decision of the California Air Resources Board to auction "emission allowance" permits under its cap-and-trade program on various grounds. Parties to the appeal will have until June 25, 2015, to respond to the Amicus Briefs should they desire.
Oral arguments on the appeal are expected to commence no sooner than November, mainly due to the complexity of the issues taken up in the appeal. PLF does not expect to see a decision by the Third District Appellate court until spring 2015.
Article written by John Larrea, California League of Food Processors, Government Affairs Director
California League Of Food Producers