The court holds that the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) did not violate the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) when it authorized and issued a finding of no significant impact for the taking of land into trust for a California Native American t...

The court holds that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS') final supplemental environmental impact statement (FSEIS) for its program to control the population of sea lampreys in Lake Champlain and its tributaries was adequate. In addition to employing physical barriers and trapping to reduce a...

The court holds that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) failed to satisfy the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Management Act's (Atlantic Coastal Act's) consultation requirement before promulgating a final rule governing lobster fishing in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off the U.S. Atlantic ...

The court holds that application of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to a commercial housing development that threatened the continued existence of the arroyo southwestern toad, an endangered species, was a constitutional exercise of federal authority under the U.S. Commerce Clause. The court previo...

The court rejects a timber company's Declaratory Judgment Act claim against two private environmental groups, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The environmental groups filed a notice of intent to sue the FWS and the NMFS under the Endangered...

The court upholds the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS') determination that listing the northern goshawk in the western United States as a threatened or endangered species was not warranted under the Endangered Species Act. The FWS' decision was amply supported by evidence in the record. Based ...

The court reverses and remands a district court's approval of a final environmental impact statement (EIS) that failed to discuss and respond to seven scientific studies casting doubt on the U.S. Forest Service's conclusion that northern goshawks are habitat generalists. In response to the Forest Se...

The court holds that the no surprises rule, which provides regulatory assurances to holders of incidental take permits (ITPs) issued under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that they will not be required to commit funds or resources beyond those contemplated at the time the permit was issued to mitig...

The court holds that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS') denial of an incidental take permit authorizing logging on 40 acres of protected owl habitat was neither a physical nor a regulatory taking. Contrary to the lower court's decision, the landowners' claim is ripe. Although the FWS invite...

The U.S. Supreme Court held that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) did not violate NEPA, relevant CEQ regulations, or the CAA when it failed to evaluate the environmental impact of increased cross-border operations of Mexican motor carriers in its EA because any environmental i...