Environmental Justice in the Tribal Context: A Madness to EPA\u27s Method

Many American Indian tribes and their members are among those most burdened by mercury contamination. When the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set out to regulate mercury emissions from coal-fired utilities, it was aware that mercury contamination and regulation affects tribal rights and resources. EPA\u27s inquiry, therefore ought to have been differently framed, given tribes\u27 unique legal and political status. Specifically, EPA ought to have confronted squarely the impact of its decision on tribes\u27 fishing rights, rather than consider these rights as a mere afterthought. EPA \u27s process, too, should have been differently conducted EPA should have consulted with tribes from the outset, in an effort to comprehend what was at stake from tribes\u27 perspectives. Although EPA purported to consider environmental justice as it developed its Clean Air Mercury Rule, it failed utterly. In this rulemaking, EPA perpetuated, rather than ameliorated, a long history of cultural discrimination against tribes and their members. This Article examines the missteps in EPA\u27s work with the mercury rule, in the hope that the lessons gleaned here might help EPA\u27s future efforts to consider and respond to environmental injustice in the tribal context

Single-Sex Education After United States v. Virginia

In United States v. Virginia, the Supreme Court held that courts must invalidate sex-based classifications that create or perpetuate the legal, social and economic inferiority of women. This contribution to equal protection jurisprudence, however, leaves unclear when single-sex higher education remains constitutional. This article argues that the Court has been preoccupied with legislative motive in this area. A capability approach, which assesses well-being and identifies individual advantage by reference to an account of what a person is able to do or be, might better help courts determine when there is an exceedingly persuasive justification for a sex-based classification

No Mud Pies: Risk Avoidance as Risk Regulation

Regulation in the environmental context has, until recently, been guided by risk reduction - strategies that require risk-producers to prevent, limit, or clean up contaminants. However, it has increasingly come to rely on risk avoidance - strategies that call upon risk-bearers to alter their practices and ways of living so as to avoid exposure to contaminants left unabated. For example, women and children might be asked to eliminate fish from their diets to avoid the risks of methylmercury contamination; asthmatics might be advised to refrain from going outside on ozone alert days to avoid the risks of ground-level ozone pollution; and parents may be instructed to keep their children from making mud pies to avoid the risks of lead and other heavy metal contamination. However, there has not yet been a systematic effort to consider and justify a move to risk avoidance. This article undertakes this task, exploring the promise and perils of risk avoidance as a regulatory tool. Among other things, risk avoidance strategies promise cost savings and enhance autonomy. But risk avoidance is also perilous. Risk avoidance strategies are notoriously ineffective; they offer diminishing and, ultimately, finite options for managing environmental risks; they may introduce risks; and they are often unjust. In view of these and other arguments, the article concludes that, on balance, risk avoidance will be inappropriate in most instances. Finally, the article suggests that, in order to evaluate a move to risk avoidance, we need a mode of analysis that enables us to consider whether a risk - with its attendant means of avoidance - is morally, culturally, and socially acceptable

Protecting the Tribal Harvest: The Right to Catch and Consume Fish

This article transcribes a presentation delivered by Professor O’Neill at the EPA-Tribal Leaders Summit, hosted by the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, August 21-25, 2006. This article maintains that the call to protect tribal harvests—to ensure healthy and robust fisheries—is at the core of the sovereign compact between the United States and the various Native nations. The United States is, in fact, legally obligated to uphold this compact, manifested prominently in the treaties. The United States and the states are also legally bound to remedy a long history of attempts to assimilate and discriminate against Native peoples and their land- and resource-based cultures. These legal obligations mean that federal and state agencies\u27 work must be different when Native peoples—rather than just the general population—are among those affected by environmental contamination. Part I of the article discusses background issues including contamination and exposure, the impacts and regulatory responses by government regulators, and the example of Oregon’s water quality standards. Part II explains treaty guarantees, the treaty language and logic, and treaty obligations Oregon’s water quality standards. Part III examines the protections against discrimination, such as equal protection, civil rights statutes, and civil rights obligations using Oregon’s water quality standards as an example. This article concludes that agencies labor under not only legal commitments, but moral commitments as well, to fulfill their calling as trustee and steward, and to honor the treaty promises

Comments of the Center for Indian Law & Policy on Washington’s Fish Consumption Rate Technical Support Document

Comments Submitted to the Washington State Department of Ecology

Single-Sex Education After United States v. Virginia

In United States v. Virginia, the Supreme Court held that courts must invalidate sex-based classifications that create or perpetuate the legal, social and economic inferiority of women. This contribution to equal protection jurisprudence, however, leaves unclear when single-sex higher education remains constitutional. This article argues that the Court has been preoccupied with legislative motive in this area. A capability approach, which assesses well-being and identifies individual advantage by reference to an account of what a person is able to do or be, might better help courts determine when there is an exceedingly persuasive justification for a sex-based classification

Comments of the Center for Indian Law & Policy on Washington’s Fish Consumption Rate Technical Support Document

Comments Submitted to the Washington State Department of Ecology

Interleukin-1 receptor-associated kinase and TRAF-6 mediate the transcriptional regulation of interleukin-2 by interleukin-1 via NFκB but unlike interleukin-1 are unable to stabilise interleukin-2 mRNA

AbstractInterleukin-1 receptor-associated kinase, IRAK, has been shown to activate NFκB in response to interleukin-1. We have explored the involvement of IRAK in regulation of the interleukin-2 gene in the murine thymoma cell line EL4.NOB-1 by examining its effect on interleukin-2 promoter-linked reporter gene expression, interleukin-2 gene transcription and interleukin-2 protein production. Cells transfected with IRAK displayed high levels of phosphorylated IRAK, increased interleukin-2 promoter-linked reporter gene expression (which was dependent on NFκB) and interleukin-2 gene transcription. IRAK was unable, however, to increase interleukin-2 protein production. Overexpression of TRAF-6 induced similar responses and again failed to increase interleukin-2 protein production. A dominant negative TRAF-6 inhibited reporter gene expression and interleukin-2 protein production in response to both interleukin-1 and IRAK transfection. Interleukin-1 treatment and IRAK or TRAF-6 transfection increased interleukin-2 mRNA production. Only interleukin-1 treatment stabilised the induced transcripts with 50% being detectable at 20 h post induction. The interleukin-2 mRNA induced in IRAK- or TRAF-6-transfected cells was depleted by >90% at 6 h post induction. These data implicate IRAK and TRAF-6 in transcriptional regulation of interleukin-2 gene expression via NFκB, and provide direct evidence that IRAK lies upstream from TRAF-6. Neither IRAK nor TRAF-6 participates in stabilisation of interleukin-2 mRNA which is required for interleukin-2 protein production

Alterations in gut microbiota caused by major depressive disorder or a low FODMAP diet and where they overlap

Beneficial changes in microbiota observed in individuals with a major depressive disorder (MDD) may be initiated with a low fermentable oligosaccharide, disaccharide, monosaccharide, and polyol (FODMAP) elimination diet. Academic Search Ultimate, APA PsychINFO, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science were searched for original research documenting differences in microbiota in MDD or changes with a low FODMAP diet in adults (age 18 years +). Studies with fecal microbiota, 16 s RNA sequencing and QIIME pipelines were included. Studies using antibiotics, probiotics, and medications such as antidepressants were excluded. Additionally, studies based on a single gender were excluded as gender impacts microbiota changes in MDD. Four studies addressed differences in microbiota with MDD and another four assessed shifts occurring with a low FODMAP diet. The abundance of Bacteroidetes, Bacteroidaceae and Bacteroides were lower in individuals with MDD but increased with a low FODMAP diet. Abundance of Ruminoccaceae was lower and Bilophila was higher with both a low FODMAP diet and MDD. These results provide preliminary evidence that a low FODMAP diet might drive changes in microbiota that also benefit people with MDD. Further research to assess whether a low FODMAP diet can treat MDD through modification of targeted microbiota is warranted.</p