In late summer and early fall of 2015, news of the plight of thousands of mid-Eastern refugees fleeing to Europe filled the mainstream media. The world watched in horror as these media outlets made daily reports on the suffering of migrants, from stories of people suffocating in the back of smugglers’ trucks to the drowning of a three-year old child who had washed up on the shores of a Turkish beach. In the United States, news stories from the mainstream media have appeared about towns in Alaska that are facing imminent relocation efforts due to rising seas and melting tundra. It is all a part of a growing global phenomenon--shocking, costly, and deadly exoduses. In the past, we have heard stories of climate change and animal displacement. However, this time the stories are not solely about polar bears, fish, and birds struggling to survive as their habitats change or disappear. Humans are now being forced to relocate in an effort to cope with the effects of climate change. According to climate scientist Richard Seager, “[t]he current refugee crisis marks a watershed moment in the history of global warming because it is the first wave of emigration to be explicitly linked to climate change ....” Mass migration is going to become the new normal, and currently, there are few international or domestic laws in place that provide protection to climate change refugees. This paper critically examines how climate change migrants and the lack of coordinated international response threaten global security, how current international and domestic policies inadequately provide human rights protections to those refugees, and how international and domestic regulations can be written or amended to better safeguard the human rights of climate change migrants. Drawing on events from around the globe, including the United States, Africa, the Middle East, and small island nations in the South Pacific, this paper examines the multiple causes of human migration and the stresses it puts on a nation’s economic and political security. The paper discusses both the types and numbers of migrants as well as the terminology debate over what to call these migrants, which is one of the critical reasons why current international and domestic legal frameworks are inadequate in providing human rights protections to climate change-induced refugees. The paper concludes that the time is ripe for an international legal agreement addressing the concerns and needs of climate change- *458 induced migrants to be developed and adopted in order to provide a long-term human rights’ solution for climate change victims.

For the past 45 years, the EPA has set uniform national ambient air quality standards for common pollutants pursuant to the mandate of the Clean Air Act. The pollutant that has been the most difficult to control is ozone. Much of the nation’s population lives in areas that fail to meet the health-based standards for this pollutant. Ozone nonattainment areas include most of California and the Northeast corridor from Northern Virginia to New York, as well as many of the largest metropolitan areas throughout the nation. Over the years, updated ozone standards have become increasingly stringent, which is resulting in a backlash over the cost of compliance. The compliance requirements are particularly challenging for rural areas in the West, where imported pollution and less than ideal meteorological conditions make compliance difficult and costly. Costs have not been used when determining air quality standards, but this may not be the best policy decision. The EPA is ratcheting down the ozone standards and this will add many new nonattainment areas with new responsibilities for controlling air emissions. This can be expected to lead to more confrontation between the regulated states and the EPA.

Many scholars have analyzed whether a border tax adjustment (BTA) on carbon would comply with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). None, however, have presented the details of such a BTA. This paper consolidates the treaty arguments upon the design features of a border tax adjustment which is compliant with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. I present the details of such a BTA and compare and contrast it with alternative BTA designs. Ultimately, a carbon BTA does not negate the need for international diplomacy and the presentation of the carbon BTA identifies some of what that diplomacy might involve.