Regulation of air pollution clearly is within the power of the federal government under the commerce clause

Other courts have employed the same strategy of asserting that state participation in federal regulatory programs which threaten usurpation of regulatory roles if the state does not comply with mandatory minimum standards is voluntary.

We now proceed to determine whether under § 10 of the Administrative Procedure Act, the Administrator's action was "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law." 5 USC § 706 (2)(A).

Just one year earlier, the DC Circuit had dismissed those precise questions as unripe since no tribal redesignation had yet been made

In the area of pollution emission the court has upheld the use of modeling techniques which lacked precision in measuring the predicted effect a proposed new source will have on the ambient air in order to determine whether the effect is within the allowable increment (deterioration of quality) for a given region.

The Supreme Court then denied certiorari, vacated the lower court's judgment, and remanded the case due to the impending Clean Air Act amendments and possible mootness.

In the third case, another court upheld Congress' power to delegate authority to the states to implement national regulations.

"14 The Court noted with approval the many lower court decisions recognizing authority in Congress to pass a broad range of environmental statutes under the Commerce Clause.

There are numerous recent examples of federal abdication or concession of gov-ernmental responsibility in favor of the states.

[BOOK] A political, legal and economic overview

[BOOK] Forces and Potential for a European Identity