On May 22, 2025, several environmental groups, RISE St. James, Micah Six Eight Mission, The Descendants Project, The Concerned Citizens of St. John Inc., Claiborne Avenue Alliance Design Studio, Inc., and JOIN for Clean Air, have sued Louisiana public officials charged with enforcing the State’s Community Air Monitoring Reliability Act (“CAMRA” or “the Act”) in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana, alleging that the CAMRA violates their constitutional rights and is preempted by the Clean Air Act (“CAA”). RISE St. James Louisiana v. Burdette, (M.D. La. May 22, 2025). The groups’ complaint requests the court to declare CAMRA unconstitutional and to permanently enjoin Louisiana officials from enforcing the Act.
In particular, the groups allege that, although the CAMRA purports to ensure that data collected from community air monitoring programs “provides the public with access to accurate air quality information,” the Act’s requirements instead unlawfully “restrict how community groups can collect, use, and disseminate information about air quality.”
As an alternative to more costly EPA-regulatory grade monitors, or Federal Reference Methods (FRM), community groups use low-cost air sensor technology to monitor air pollution levels in certain areas of the country. When engaged in collecting, using, and disseminating this air monitoring information, the groups contend that they are engaging in constitutionally protected speech. As such, the groups argue that CAMRA unconstitutionally restricts their speech because it allows them to collect air monitoring information using these air sensors, as opposed to federally-approved methods, only if the groups do not use that information to allege a violation of, or noncompliance with, the CAA, Louisiana Environmental Quality Act, or any other applicable law, rule, or regulation for which the state has primary enforcement authority. In other words, the groups contend that CAMRA prevents them from disseminating monitoring data to the public in the manner of their own choosing. Supporters of CAMRA would likely argue that it does not restrict the use of non-FRM data for all speech. The provisions were intended only to prevent its use in agency or citizen enforcement.
The groups further allege that these restrictions do not apply to industry participants because CAMRA excludes from its application “any organization, group, company, owner, or operator of a stationary source developing or administering an air monitoring program.” Accordingly, CAMRA creates, as the groups put it, “speaker-based distinctions that presume that air monitoring information lacks accuracy if disseminated by community air monitoring groups, but not by industry participants or the state.” Because Louisiana lacks a legitimate compelling interest in restricting the groups’ speech in the manner that CAMRA does and has not tailored the Act to achieve a legitimate state interest, the groups claim that it violates their First Amendment rights.
Additionally, the groups in their complaint argue that, because the CAMRA “effectively prevents” them from conducting air monitoring using non-FRM air sensors, the Act conflicts with the CAA and with EPA efforts to encourage broader adoption of community air monitoring. The groups also complain that the CAMRA restricts the groups’ ability to share air monitoring information with EPA to support, for example, enforcement actions, which the complaint says “conflict[s] with Clean Air Act provisions that authorize EPA to bring enforcement actions based on ‘any information available’ about potential violations of emissions standards and that reward persons that furnish information to EPA for information that result in successful enforcement actions.”
Ultimately, the groups claim that they are entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief to bar the Louisiana officials from enforcing CAMRA’s requirements against them because the CAMRA violates the groups’ constitutional rights and conflicts with federal law.
Liskow will be monitoring this litigation for further updates. For more information on the Community Air Monitoring Reliability Act and potential industry impacts, please contact Liskow attorneys Greg Johnson, Clare Bienvenu, and Colin North and visit our Environmental Regulatory practice page.