Law360, New York (June 12, 2009) -- I was very surprised to read the June 9 Law360 guest column characterizing Judge Sotomayor’s Riverkeeper v. EPA, 475 F.3d 83 (2007) opinion, particularly the cost-benefit analysis portion of the opinion, as indicating “a willingness to question and possibly overturn the agency's rulemaking decision, notwithstanding the deference customarily afforded an expert agency interpreting a technical statute.”
Because about half the column was devoted to this case, and may have left readers with an inaccurate impression, I was moved to respond....
