1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Environmental Petitioners ask Second Circuit for Rehearing

Environmental Petitioners ask Second Circuit for Rehearing

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.15.05

Environmental Petitioners yesterday (April 14, 2005) asked the Second Circuit for a rehearing on a critical element of the court's February 28, 2005 decision on EPA's 2003 CAFO Rulemaking. Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. et al. v. EPA, (No. 03-4470, et al.). The pleading asks the court to overturn its decision that CAFOs do not have a "duty to apply" for an NPDES permit. The pleading also asks the court — if it refuses to reverse itself on the "duty to apply" issue — to require CAFOs to have an approved nutrient management plan in an NPDES permit to qualify for the "agricultural stormwater" exemption from NPDES permitting.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26

DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability

On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”...