Bonser-Lain v. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. Country/Territory United States of America Type of court National - lower court Date Aug 2, 2012 Source UNEP, InforMEA Court name United States District Court, District of Texas Seat of court Travis County Judge Triana Reference number No. D-1-GN-11-002194 Language English Subject Air & atmosphere, Environment gen., Legal questions Keyword Air quality/air pollution Air quality standards Climate change Abstract In the underlying lawsuit, the Texas Environmental Law Center sued the TCEQ on behalf of a group of children and young adults. The Center asserted that the State of Texas had a fiduciary duty to reduce the emissions as the common law trustee of a "public trust" responsible for the air and atmosphere. Similar to Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497 (2007)a proceeding which successfully challenged the EPA's refusal to regulate greenhouse gases the Texas lawsuit was brought after the TCEQ denied plaintiffs' petition for rulemaking related to greenhouse gas regulations. Plaintiffs then sought judicial review to force the TCEQ to regulate the emissions. They argued that the atmosphere is a "public trust" under the common law; a "fundamental natural resource necessarily entrusted to the care of our federal government...for its preservation and protection as a common property interest Despite the “displacement” or preemption of common law remedies in the climate change arena recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in American Electric Power Company v. Connecticut, 564 U.S (2011), the Texas district judge in Bonser-Lain stated in a letter that he disagreed with TECQs position that the public trust doctrine should be limited to water issues. Rather, the Court concluded that all natural resources of the State fell within the ambit of the doctrine. Judge Triana reasoned that, because whether TCEQ has authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Texas Clean Air Act is an issue involved in a separate case that is on appeal to the Third Court of Appeals, "the legal landscape is uncertain" and "the Commissions refusal to exercise its authority based on current litigation is a reasonable exercise of its discretion. The Court will find that the Commissions conclusion, that the public trust doctrine is exclusively limited to the conservation of water, is legally invalid. The doctrine includes all natural resources of the State. In reaching this decision, the court expressly stated that the public trust doctrine "is not simply a common law doctrine" but is incorporated into the Texas Constitution, which (1) protects "the conservation and development of all the resources of the State," (2) declares conservation of those resources "public rights and duties," and (3) directs the Legislature to pass appropriate laws to protect these resources. The court also relied upon the Texas Clean Air Act as an additional ground of the TCEQ's authority to act "to protect against adverse effects, including global warming. Full text COU-159572.pdf