Two of Brad’s articles are now in print:
- Reading the Standing Tea Leaves in American Electric Power v. Connecticut, 46 U. Rich. L. Rev. 543 (2012); and
- Informational Standing after Summers, 39 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 1 (2011).
Several of Brad’s articles were cited:
- Rewarding Defendant Cooperation under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines: Judges vs. Prosecutors, 26 Crim. L. Bull. 399 (1990), in F. Lee Bailey & Kenneth J. Fishman, Handling Narcotic and Drug Cases (Clark Boardman Callaghan 1972 & Supp. 2012);
- The Murky Future of the Clean Water Act after SWANCC: Using a Hydrological Connection Approach to Saving the Clean Water Act , 30 Ecol. L.Q. 811 (2003), in Blake Hudson, Reconstituting Land-Use Federalism to Address Transitory and Perpetual Disasters: The Bimodal Federalism Framework, 2011 B.Y.U. L. Rev. 1991;
- Protecting Intrastate Threatened Species: Does the Endangered Species Act Encroach on Traditional State Authority and Exceed the Outer Limits of the Commerce Clause?, 36 Ga. L. Rev. 723 (2002), in Blake Hudson, Reconstituting Land-Use Federalism to Address Transitory and Perpetual Disasters: The Bimodal Federalism Framework, 2011 B.Y.U. L. Rev. 1991;
- Should States Have Greater Standing Rights Than Ordinary Citizens?: Massachusetts v. EPA’s New Standing Test for States, 49 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 1701 (2008), in Heather Elliott, Standing Lessons: What We Can Learn When Conservative Plaintiffs Lose under Article III Standing Doctrine, 87 Ind. L.J. 551 (2012);
- Should States Have Greater Standing Rights Than Ordinary Citizens?: Massachusetts v. EPA’s New Standing Test for States, 49 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 1701 (2008), in Devin McDougall, Reconciling Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife and Massachusetts v. EPA on the Set of Procedural Rights Eligible for Relaxed Article III Standing, 37 Colum. J. Envtl. L. 151 (2012);
- Standing and Future Generations: Does Massachusetts v. EPA Open Standing for the Unborn?, 34 Colum. J. Envtl. L. 1 (2009), in Devin McDougall, Reconciling Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife and Massachusetts v. EPA on the Set of Procedural Rights Eligible for Relaxed Article III Standing, 37 Colum. J. Envtl. L. 151 (2012);
- Standing and Statistical Persons: A Risk-Based Approach to Standing, 36 Ecol. L.Q. 665 (2009), in Heather Elliott, Standing Lessons: What We Can Learn When Conservative Plaintiffs Lose under Article III Standing Doctrine, 87 Ind. L.J. 551 (2012); and
- Summers v. Earth Island Institute Rejects Probabilistic Standing, But Laidlaw Still Leaves an Opening for Threatened Injuries, 40 Envtl. L. 89 (2010), in Devin McDougall, Reconciling Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife and Massachusetts v. EPA on the Set of Procedural Rights Eligible for Relaxed Article III Standing, 37 Colum. J. Envtl. L. 151 (2012).