ÉMERGENCE ET RÉGRESSION DE LA NOTION DE DÉMOCRATIE ENVIRONNEMENTALE AUX Etats-Unis (The Growth and Retreat of Environmental Democracy in the United States)

French Abstract: Il est presque impossible de decrire la relation entre l’environnementalisme et la democratie en Amerique, non seulement a cause de l’espace restreint de cette contribution, mais aussi parce que chacun de ces concepts est complexe, vaste et multivalent, et que la relation entre les deux est indirecte et degradee. Les incidents lies a l’activite environnementale sont rares, ils sont marques autant par des actions que par des omissions, et il n’est donc pas evident de voir comment ils se situent en relation a des moments de praxis democratique. En outre, chacun existe dans un reseau encore plus complexe et est impacte par des conditions et des evenements sociaux, culturels, economiques et politiques. Il est donc impossible d'affirmer qu'aux Etats-Unis la longue avancee de l'environnementalisme a correspondu aux hauts et aux bas de l'activite democratique. Dans cette contribution, nous limiterons nos commentaires a l’experience des Etats-Unis d’Amerique, non seulement en raison de l’influence considerable que cet Etat a eue et continue d’avoir a travers le monde, mais aussi parce que l’histoire americaine nous fournit l’illustration de beaucoup d’opportunites qui se sont presentees pour la protection de l’environnement et de beaucoup d’occasions manquees. Il s’agit de retracer brievement une histoire remplie d'espoirs et de deceptions, de progres et de reculs, d’emergence d’une idee de democratie environnementale et de regression de cette idee. Mais les Etats-Unis ne sont pas le seul pays a entretenir une relation entre environnementalisme et democratie qui ne soit ni lineaire ni directe. Tout au long de l'histoire, et a travers le monde, certains progres environnementaux ont ete realises dans des lieux ou la democratie n'est pas profondement enracinee, mais il est egalement vrai que les pays dotes de democraties profondement consolidees ne sont pas necessairement les plus respectueux de l'environnement. English Abstract: This chapter explains the lack of stronger environmental protection outcomes given the democracy-advancing attributes of U.S. law. The answer lies in understanding that the U.S. Supreme Court has construed the U.S. Constitution as embodying myriad anti-democratic limitations that thwart the effectiveness of democracy in environmental governance. First, there are several doctrines that prevent plaintiffs from enforcing federal environmental laws. Relatedly, the Court has also been unwilling to afford more process in environmental matters than that which Congress specifically affords, for example, under the National Environmental Policy Act. Second, structural imposts rooted in separation of powers can also prevent the enforcement of environmental laws, including the political question and abstention doctrines, forum non conveniens and the displacement doctrine. The federal government also possesses limited authority to protect the environment. The Court has also interpreted the Constitution as limiting federal and state authority to enact environmental laws in a variety of ways. Under the “Commerce Clause.” Congress cannot require state governments or state officials to implement federal laws, including federal environmental programs. Moreover, Congress cannot threaten to withhold federal funding of such programs in ways that are ‘coercive’ to the states or subject states to private causes of action, including for violating federal environmental laws, unless the state consents to being sued. Third, despite the constitutional charge to “take care that laws are faithfully executed,” the U.S. President has discretion to enforce federal environmental laws. The President also possesses unitary authority to establish foreign policy in environmental matters. Fourth, while each state is a sovereign under a system known as “federalism,” the Court has concluded that the U.S. Constitution limits progressive environmental policies from the states in several ways. Moreover, the Court has construed Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment to prevent state and local government authorities from restricting the use of private property so as to protect the environment in ways that “go too far” and amount to ‘regulatory takings.’ Last, the Court has not construed the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution to advance environmental protection. All of these facets affect environmental democracy in the United States.