PODCAST: Environmental Regulation Under the Trump Administration — C&M’s First 100 Days Series
Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.17.16
In the second podcast of Crowell & Moring’s “First 100 Days” series, Partner Tom Lorenzen and Counsel David Chung of the firm’s Environment & Natural Resources Group sit down to discuss what environmental regulation might look like under president-elect Trump’s new administration. Tom served in the U.S. DOJ’s Environment & Natural Resources Division for more than 15 years, experiencing first-hand the transition between two presidential administrations – from President Clinton to President Bush, and from President Bush to President Obama.
Covered in this 15 minute podcast:
- Trump and the EPA – how climate change regulation and the coal industry might be affected.
- Priorities for revising or revoking rules put in place by the Obama Administration.
- What might throw a wrench in the new administration’s plans to roll back certain rules.
- New environmental regulations the Trump administration might issue.
- Who might be chosen to lead the EPA.
Click below to listen or access from one of these links:
PodBean | SoundCloud | iTunes
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
