Summary

• Objects (0 modified, 0 added, 1 removed)
  • Caselist.CitesClass[19]

Details

Caselist.CitesClass[19]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,16 +1,0 @@
1		-CP Text: The United States should,
2		--Require the use of the disparate impact model in court for cases on environmental racism
3		-
4		-and
5		-
6		--Establish civilian review boards made up of minority community members to review hazardous waste siting, and plant construction, facilities
7		-
8		-The CP solves- it shifts the burden of proof to polluters allowing successful court challenges. Ulezalka JD, 07
9		-(Tara, http://www.temple.edu/law/tjstel/2007/spring/v26no1-Ulezalka.pdf Race and Waste: The Quest for Environmental Justice )
10		-
11		-The residents of Chester may already have begun the best approach to finding a solution to environmental injustice. Because minorities possess less political clout, they need to find a way to have their voices heard early in the game, before the court gets involved. Instead of waiting until the state grants a permit for a waste facility siting, those in opposition need to attend the hearings and meetings early when the state is first deciding whether or not to grant the permit. Residents of Chester have begun to use this option by going into DEP hearings and letting those involved know that they do not agree with the siting of waste facilities in their town. By successfully organizing and empowering the residents of Chester into action, Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living (CRCQL) has been sending a strong message to any waste company that if they intend to come into their community, information about the company’s compliance history, suspect dealings and the truth on how they disrupt the community will come out. While residents of Chester have begun this process, it needs to be expanded nationwide, as the problem of environmental injustice is a national problem, not a localized one. Proposed solutions to the impregnably high evidentiary bar faced by environmental racism plaintiffs have also included the adoption of a disparate impact model.132 Under this model, the plaintiff would bear the burden of proving that the challenged siting decision would result in a disproportionate burden on a minority community as compared to a white community.133 Once this showing is made, the burden would shift to the defendant who would be given the opportunity to rebut the plaintiff’s evidence with a showing that the decision was an “environmental necessity.”134 The burden would then shift back to the plaintiff to provide alternative equally environmentally suitable sites, which the defendant again can rebut by a showing that the challenged site was necessary to safely dispense with hazardous materials.135 If the defendant is able to show and then prove the "environmental necessity" element, then the challenged facility will be allowed to be built in the plaintiff's community despite the disparate impact, which will result.136 This model theoretically lowers the evidentiary bar for environmental racism plaintiffs in that they could potentially win relief without a "smoking gun" document proving discriminatory intent. However, the problem of actually proving a disparate impact remains. Cases such as Bean demonstrate this difficulty. On the other hand, with a disparate impact model in effect, the plaintiffs in East-Bibb and R.I.S.E. may have obtained the relief they were seeking, because in both cases the strongest evidence produced was that of the existence of a disparate impact.137 It seems as if the disparate impact model remains the most promising solution available. Before it can be successful, however, authorities at the state and federal level must work together. As it currently stands, most states, when considering the suitability of a proposed site, perform some measure of an environmental impact review to determine the effects the proposed facility would have on the community and environment in which it is being built.138 (69-70)
12		-
13		-Special review boards solves future harms and can rollback existing environmental racism. Ulezalka JD, 07
14		-(Tara, http://www.temple.edu/law/tjstel/2007/spring/v26no1-Ulezalka.pdf Race and Waste: The Quest for Environmental Justice )
15		-
16		-State governments should declare as an objective the eradication of race-based inequalities in the burdens of hazardous waste facilities. States are inadequately addressing distributional equity. States will have to combine the approaches currently in effect and make a direct effort to take into account the racial and socioeconomic characteristics of potential hazardous waste sites.146 Site designation would best address the question of equity from the state’s perspective. This approach would allow the relevant state agency to assess the current distribution of hazardous waste facilities and determine whether minority communities are particularly affected. If so, the agency can use racial makeup as a criterion when compiling a short list of potential sites. But this alone will not succeed. Chosen communities, such as Chester, will obviously oppose the site. Therefore, states should also use the super review approach.147 Using the later approach and at the same time giving responsibility to a state agency rather than a developer to designate sites will eliminate one primary criticism of the super review approach: the cost-conscious developer choosing sites. The creation of a special siting board to facilitate communication and information between the state and the locale may minimize opposition. A state dedicated to ameliorating the disparate impact on minorities could first create a permanent agency or board.148 This board would be responsible for selecting an inventory of candidate sites for commercial hazardous waste facilities. The number of sites placed on the inventory would depend both on the amount of waste generated and the number of environmentally suitable sites. When evaluating sites, the board should assess environmental suitability,149 economic feasibility, risks and effects for local residents, adverse effects on agriculture and natural resources,150 and whether the locale is already burdened by environmental hazards. If the board finds that a number of sites equally satisfy the above criteria, it should take into consideration the racial and socioeconomic makeup of the potential candidate sites. If existing commercial hazardous waste facilities are sited disproportionately in minority communities, the board can remove sites that are predominantly minority from the inventory. This model would ensure that, while protecting environmental considerations, minority communities are not disparately burdened by hazardous waste sites.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-2016-09-16 23:48:03.0

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Koshak and Sims

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Dulles AW

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-21

Round

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-3

Team

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Harvard Westlake Enge Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Environmental Justice CP

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Greenhill RR