Name of Destination/Presentation/Event: Environmental Law Speaker Event organized by Kappa Omega Alpha, the public policy fraternity.
Name of Presenter: Speakers were: Joel Gross, Former Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, DOJ, 1995-2000 Tom Mariani, Former Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, DOJ, 2015-2025
Date and Location of Event: November 13, 2025 in the Thurgood Marshall Building Room 0301
At the Environmental Law speaker event, two of the DOJ’s former Chiefs of the Environmental Enforcement Section spoke to us about the ups and downs of their experiences with environmental law. In this summarization I will address the questions asked during the event and the former chief’s responses to them. The first question asked was “what was environmental law like when they first started practicing and what is it like now in the present day?” Joel Gross answered first and stated that he first started practicing in the 1970’s during the Nixon administration where environmental law first started getting acknowledged. He went on to mention that environmental law back then was more of a bipartisan issue and the nation began realising that the environment had been ignored for a long time. He referred to one example of this being the Cuyahoga River fire where the heavily polluted river caught fire due to industrial waste, sparking national outrage, leading to the creation of the EPA, and catalyzing major environmental laws like the Clean Water Act. So in turn, during the 70’s there was a massive string of environmental laws put in place to address these issues. In the present, he explains that we can see the positive effects and improvements these laws have had on the environment with the planet having cleaner resources. Transitioning, the next question was about climate change and if we're screwed, as well as what could be done on the policy side of things. Former chief, Tom Mariani answered no we are not screwed because there is always more we can do. He acknowledges there will always be some type of risk involved and when asking what the government/policy makers should do, they have to consider what the right balance will be and what they are willing to call safe when it won’t be a zero in terms of risk. Overall, the two former chiefs were optimistic about the mission to combat climate change and environmental issues but also acknowledged that there are hindering factors such as the current administration, financial burdens, and more, that will make the process longer. While the federal government may not be complying and as urgent, individual states have government and municipalities that can do their own part in addressing climate.
Throughout this speaking event, I found myself more and more aware and convinced of what the two former chiefs from the DOJ were trying to point out. Their knowledge and long standing careers within the realm of environmental law helped me better understand some of the overarching issues that have been or still need to be addressed. With the main point about how environmental law has changed since the 70s to now, there are some additional pieces of information that I want to state. In the early 1970s, modern environmental regulation in the United States and many other countries emerged in response to visible pollution crises, burning rivers, toxic air, and unchecked industrial waste. Laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act (1970), the Clean Air Act (1970), the Clean Water Act (1972), and the Endangered Species Act (1973) laid the foundation for federal oversight, introduced permitting systems, and established the concept that government has a responsibility to protect environmental quality. These laws were largely command-and-control in nature, setting strict limits and prohibitions aimed at reducing harm. Over time, environmental law expanded in both scope and sophistication. By the 1980s and 1990s, regulations began to incorporate scientific advances, risk assessment, and cost-benefit analysis. Hazardous waste management, chemical regulation, and emergency response laws, such as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and Superfund, reflected increasing public awareness of long-term contamination and the need for cleanup accountability. Courts also played a critical role, interpreting early statutes and shaping doctrines such as standing, citizen suits, and environmental review. Since the 2000s, the field has shifted toward addressing global and systemic challenges, most notably climate change. International agreements like the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement illustrate the move toward cooperative global governance. Domestic environmental law now increasingly integrates climate adaptation, carbon mitigation, and renewable energy standards. Concepts such as environmental justice, cumulative impacts, and Indigenous rights, largely absent in the 1970s, have become central elements of policymaking and litigation. These developments reflect recognition that environmental burdens and benefits are unevenly distributed and that legal systems must address equity along with ecological protection.