{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03137789904502047, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010914051841746248, 'mean_word_length': 4.397058823529412, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The landmark case that almost never was

A law professor investigates the legal decision to regulate U.S. greenhouse gases The U.S. Supreme Court's 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency is widely seen as the most important U.S. environmental ruling of all time. But the suit, which led to a ruling that the Clean Air Act of 1970 empowered the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate greenhouse gases, was almost never brought. Richard J. Lazarus's new book, The Rule of Five, is the inside story of how this case came to be, how its lawyers struggled and fought over theories and roles, and how the late Justice John Paul Stevens patched together the five votes needed to secure a majority.