[144] MIHAELA POPESCU ∗ OSCAR H. GANDY, JR. ∗∗ Whose Environmental Justice? Social Identity and Institutional Rationality The recent decision in Alexander v. Sandoval 1 has seriously limited the available opportunities for minorities to argue their claims for environmental justice. Prior to Sandoval, plaintiffs alleging disparate impact as a result of the policies implemented by a federally funded agency met with moderate success under Title VI section 602. 2 After Sandoval, however, the chances of success in private litigations for the aggrieved communities look decidedly bleak. Although the Court in Sandoval admitted a private right of action under Title VI section 601, 3 it interpreted section 601 to depend upon a showing of intentional discrimination. This restriction poses ∗ The Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. ∗∗ The Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 1 Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275 (2001). A deeply divided Supreme Court held that no private right of action exists to enforce Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, section 602. Section 602 provides that: “Each Federal department and agency which is empowered to extend Federal financial assistance to any program or activity . . . is authorized and directed to effectuate the provisions of section 2000d of this title . . . by issuing rules, regulations, or orders of general applicability . . . .” 2 See, e.g., Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living v. Seif, 132 F.3d 925 (3rd Cir. 1997), vacated, 524 U.S. 974 (1998). 3 Section 601 of Title VI provides that: “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”