The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review of a FERC order approving the construction of new facilities to allow for the flow of natural gas from Mexico northbound into southern California. FERC's EIS contained a reasonably thorough discussion of the environmental impact of its actions based on ...
The court holds that the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM's) denial under the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Land Withdrawal Act of an application to drill on an oil and gas lease did not constitute a permanent taking of the leaseholder's rights. BLM denied the application until the U.S. Environ...
The court upholds the U.S. Department of the Interior's (DOI's) decision to deny lessors' request to cancel their Native American oil and gas lease because of the lessee's royalty underpayment violations. The court first holds that the lessors' constitutional argument is meritless. Instead of arguin...
The court grants a city's petition for review and reverses the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC's) order requiring the city to conduct a study of the effects of the Yelm Hydroelectric Project on the anadromous fish in the Nisqually River in Washington. The study would be used to determin...
The government use of compulsory purchase and land use control powers appears to be increasing worldwide as competition for useable and livable space increases. The need for large and relatively undeveloped space for agriculture and conservation purposes often competes with the need for shelter and the commercial and industrial development accompanying such development for employment, product production and distribution, and other largely urban uses.
Editors' Summary: Property rights advocates implicitly complained in Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon that a Fish and Wildlife Service regulation that aimed to protect endangered and threatened species by defining "harm" to include habitat modification impinged on their rights as private landowners by asking them to share with the government responsibility for protecting such species. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the regulation as reasonable given the relevant language of the Endangered Species Act.
The bedrock notion that courts should, in the overwhelming majority of cases, defer to lawmakers is currently under attack in the nation's courts, commentary, and classrooms. Leading the way are several U.S. Supreme Court Justices who, in cases involving the U.S. Commerce Clause, Takings Clause, and §5 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, are much more willing than their immediate predecessors to second-guess the motives and tactics of elected and appointed officials at all levels of government.
Editors' Summary: Although most talk in terms of wildlife protection seems to focus on the operation of the ESA, there are a host of other federal and state laws designed to protect wildlife from the impacts of resource-development projects—before the species become threatened or endangered.
A district court denies property owners' motions to sanction the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for violating discovery orders in the owners' toxic-tort suit against DOE contractors that operate the Rocky Flats nuclear weapons production facility. The court also denies, for the most part, the contr...
The Court holds that the issue of liability in a developer's regulatory takings claim against a city was properly submitted to a jury. After the city imposed more rigorous demands each time it denied five proposals to develop a 37.6-acre oceanfront parcel in Monterey, California, the developer filed...