Published from 1971 to 2017, Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review was one of the nation's first two law reviews dedicated to environmental law.

In 2017, the journal, along with three of Boston College Law School's other student-edited journals was consolidated into a single, larger journal published under the title <em>Boston College Law Review.</em>

Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review

There is little doubt that war has a deleterious effect on the natural environment of battlegrounds. Customary principles of international law, as well as more formal instruments such as treaties, address wartime environmental protection. An analysis of these mechanisms reveals that they are inadequate to ensure protection and restoration of environmental resources damaged during war. Thus, a mechanism is needed for assessing civil liability against nations for any wartime environmental damage. The United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), created to compensate victims of the Persian Gulf War, is a mechanism that if modified could fill this void. This Note focuses on the modifications that could make the UNCC a successful mechanism for assessing civil liability for wartime environmental damage. Further, this Note applies the adapted UNCC to the Iraq War, and examines whether U.S.-led coalition forces should be held civilly liable for damage to Iraq’s natural environment.

Civil Liability for Wartime Environmental Damage: Adapting the United Nations Compensation for the Iraq War

Masthead

On June 20, 2005, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in San Remo Hotel, L.P. v. City of San Francisco, holding that property owners with “takings” claims arising under the Fifth Amendment could not obtain federal review after litigating in state court in compliance with the ripeness requirements of Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank. The case presented the specific question of whether federal takings claimants could invoke an exception to claim and issue preclusion doctrines under England v. Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners because Williamson County forced them to involuntarily litigate in state court. This Article reviews the San Remo decision, criticizing the majority’s narrow interpretation of England and the result in banishing takings claims to state courts. The Article then explores the Williamson County ripeness requirement, and condemns the majority’s decision for failing to explicitly address Williamson County’s flaws. Finally, the Article considers whether San Remo closes the federal courthouse door to takings claims seeking noncompensatory relief.

You Can Check Out But You Can Never Leave: The Story of San Remo Hotel -- The Supreme Court Relegates Federal Takings Claims to State Courts Under a Rule Intended to Ripen the Claims for Federal Review

Water resource management plays a critical role in everything from the viability of individual communities to regional political stability. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the Nile Basin. The Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) is a recent effort to overcome historical clashes over use of the Nile’s waters in order to achieve a basin-wide framework for transboundary cooperation. One element of NBI focuses on community-level action in furtherance of transboundary cooperation, and includes a microgrant program to help achieve its goals. Signiªcantly, however, NBI does not include a microcredit program. This Note argues that, in light of the deep connections between inadequate water resources and the marginalization of women and the poor, NBI should supplement its microgrant program with microcredit programs to further its goals. More broadly, this Note advocates for the use of microcredit programs—which are generally implemented only in the development aid arena—in an environmental context.

Development Aid in an Environmental Context: Using Microfinance to Promote Equitable and Sustainable Water Use in the Nile Basin

In American jurisprudence, the public trust doctrine emerged as a means of protecting certain limited environmental interests, such as coastal waterways and fishing areas, which were preserved for the benefit of the public and distinguished from grants of private ownership. However, modern scholars have called for an expansive application of the public trust doctrine, citing the growing inventory of “changing public needs” in the environmental context, such as the need for improved air and water quality, and the conservation of natural landscape. This Article examines the history and scope of the public trust doctrine to determine how modern resource management fits within the doctrine’s development under the Constitution and common law. Such an examination is incomplete without reviewing the important principles of Natural Law underlying the original doctrine. In the end, the Article concludes that modern trust expansion should be limited within the ancient values of principled economic reasoning.

The Public Trust Doctrine and Natural Law: Emanations Within a Penumbra

Injuries resulting from environmental conditions created by improvements to real property have always been commonplace. Across jurisdictions, however, there is some evidence to suggest that defendants may be able to escape liability for certain environmentally-related injuries by invoking statutes of repose. Although statutes of repose may protect defendants from prejudice in court and relieve them of past obligations, they may also prevent injured plaintiffs from obtaining redress in court where their injuries were latent or undiscoverable. This Note explores the nature and purpose of statutes of repose, discusses whether they might be used by defendants during environmental litigation by addressing case law and public policy considerations, and offers suggestions for balancing the interests of plaintiffs and defendants to the extent that statutes of repose are applicable to environmental injuries.

Excuses, Excuses: The Application of Statutes of Repose to Environmentally-Related Injuries

Affordable housing has always been a problem in the United States. Cities and towns originally engaged in forms of discrimination through exclusionary zoning to exclude low-income residents. While many of the social attitudes persist today, the question is how to encourage new affordable housing development. This Note introduces the concept of inclusionary zoning as a successful method for creating affordable housing. The Note examines the constitutional analyses used for land use ordinances. Then, the Note evaluates existing affordable housing programs, distinguishing between the eastern approach and the western approach. The eastern approach—represented by New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Montgomery County, Maryland—is based upon a “fair share” of affordable housing but lacks any planning requirement. The western approach, as illustrated by Oregon and California, is based upon community planning of all necessary elements including affordable housing, and have successfully required affordable housing development. Ultimately, the Note adopts a perspective that mandatory inclusionary zoning in all communities is the best option and should be valid under an impact fee-like analysis.

Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review (Vol. 33, Iss. 2)

Items in this collection

Civil Liability for Wartime Environmental Damage: Adapting the United Nations Compensation for the Iraq War

Masthead

You Can Check Out But You Can Never Leave: The Story of San Remo Hotel -- The Supreme Court Relegates Federal Takings Claims to State Courts Under a Rule Intended to Ripen the Claims for Federal Review

Development Aid in an Environmental Context: Using Microfinance to Promote Equitable and Sustainable Water Use in the Nile Basin

The Public Trust Doctrine and Natural Law: Emanations Within a Penumbra

Excuses, Excuses: The Application of Statutes of Repose to Environmentally-Related Injuries

Mandatory Inclusionary Zoning--The Answer to Affordable Housing Problem

.repo-1h6ne0y{background:#ffffff;text-transform:uppercase;padding-right:1.5rem;}.repo-1h6ne0y:after{content:'';position:absolute;background:#adadad;transform:translateY(-50%);top:50%;left:0;width:100%;height:0.1rem;z-index:-1;}Items in this collection

Masthead

You Can Check Out But You Can Never Leave: The Story of San Remo Hotel -- The Supreme Court Relegates Federal Takings Claims to State Courts Under a Rule Intended to Ripen the Claims for Federal Review

Development Aid in an Environmental Context: Using Microfinance to Promote Equitable and Sustainable Water Use in the Nile Basin

The Public Trust Doctrine and Natural Law: Emanations Within a Penumbra

Excuses, Excuses: The Application of Statutes of Repose to Environmentally-Related Injuries

Mandatory Inclusionary Zoning--The Answer to Affordable Housing Problem

Items in this collection