Connection lost
Server error
WHITMAN v. AMERICAN TRUCKING ASSNS., INC. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: The Supreme Court held that the Clean Air Act did not unconstitutionally delegate legislative power to the EPA. The Court also ruled that the Act unambiguously forbids the EPA from considering implementation costs when setting national air quality standards, affirming a core principle of agency statutory constraint.
Legal Significance: Affirmed the modern, highly deferential ‘intelligible principle’ test for nondelegation challenges, effectively insulating broad congressional delegations of authority to administrative agencies from constitutional attack. It also reinforced that agencies must adhere to clear statutory prohibitions, such as barring cost considerations where the text is silent.
WHITMAN v. AMERICAN TRUCKING ASSNS., INC. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Under § 109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for pollutants at a level “requisite to protect the public health” with an “adequate margin of safety.” In 1997, the EPA promulgated more stringent NAAQS for ozone and particulate matter. A coalition of industry groups, led by American Trucking Associations, Inc., challenged the new rules. The Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that the EPA’s interpretation of § 109 violated the nondelegation doctrine because the statute failed to provide an “intelligible principle” to guide the agency’s discretion in determining how much pollution reduction was required. The circuit court remanded for the EPA to adopt a limiting construction of the statute. However, the D.C. Circuit affirmed prior precedent that the EPA could not consider economic costs when setting NAAQS. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to address both the nondelegation and cost-consideration issues, as well as a dispute over the EPA’s statutory authority to implement the new ozone standards.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did the Clean Air Act unconstitutionally delegate legislative power to the Environmental Protection Agency by granting it authority to set air quality standards ‘requisite to protect the public health’ without providing a determinate standard, and did the Act permit the EPA to consider economic costs in setting those standards?
No. The Court reversed the D.C. Circuit on the delegation issue and Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehen
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Did the Clean Air Act unconstitutionally delegate legislative power to the Environmental Protection Agency by granting it authority to set air quality standards ‘requisite to protect the public health’ without providing a determinate standard, and did the Act permit the EPA to consider economic costs in setting those standards?
Conclusion
This case solidifies the modern nondelegation doctrine as a weak constraint on Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehender
Legal Rule
A congressional delegation of authority to an administrative agency is constitutionally permissible Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dol
Legal Analysis
The Court's analysis proceeded in two main parts. First, addressing the nondelegation Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The EPA cannot consider implementation costs when setting National Ambient Air