Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Adjudicatory jurisdiction (1)
- And welfare of a tribe (1)
- Annual fee (1)
- Appalachian Trail (1)
- Atlantic Coast Pipeline (1)
-
- CERCLA (1)
- California (1)
- Catastrophic (1)
- Clean-up permit (1)
- Cohen (1)
- Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liabilities Act (1)
- Consent (1)
- Consent decree (1)
- Containment program (1)
- Declaratory judgement (1)
- Discretion (1)
- District court (1)
- Dolgencorp (1)
- Dollar General (1)
- Due process (1)
- Dworkin (1)
- EPA (1)
- Economic security (1)
- En banc petition (1)
- Environmental Protection Agency (1)
- Existential threat to the health (1)
- FMC (1)
- FMC Corp. (1)
- FMC Corp. v. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes (1)
- Federal Indian law (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
U.S. Forest Service V. Cowpasture River Preservation Ass'n., Taylor A. Simpson
U.S. Forest Service V. Cowpasture River Preservation Ass'n., Taylor A. Simpson
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the United States Forest Service and Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC, a company who planned to construct a natural gas pipeline under a section of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail within the George Washington National Forest. The legal battle sought to clarify whether the United States Forest Service had the authority to grant the pipeline builder a right-of-way across the Appalachian Trail. The Court ruled that the National Park Service holds an easement for administering the Appalachian Trail, but the land over which the trail crosses remains under the jurisdiction of the …
Fmc Corp. V. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Seth T. Bonilla
Fmc Corp. V. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Seth T. Bonilla
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In 1998, FMC Corporation agreed to submit to the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes’ permitting processes, including the payment of fees, for clean-up work required as part of consent decree negotiations with the Environmental Protection Agency. Then, in 2002, FMC refused to pay the Tribes under a permitting agreement entered into by both parties, even though the company continued to store hazardous waste on land within the Shoshone-Bannock Fort Hall Reservation in Idaho. FMC challenged the Tribes’ authority to enforce the $1.5 million permitting fees first in tribal court and later challenged the Tribes’ authority to exercise civil regulatory and adjudicatory jurisdiction over …
Legal Interpretation, Mykaila Ashlynn Berry
Legal Interpretation, Mykaila Ashlynn Berry
Undergraduate Theses, Professional Papers, and Capstone Artifacts
The purpose of this project is to provide a fresh and in-depth analysis of legal jurisprudence through the use of two of the most important legal theorists of our time, H. L. A. Hart and Ronald Dworkin. This project focuses on how Dworkin’s position in his famous paper “Hard Cases”, helps us understand an important Supreme Court case, Cohen v. California. Cohen will be the main focus of my project. The project will discuss the case and the possible ways of deciding the case. Then the project explains both Dworkin’s and Hart’s positions. Finally, the project will analyze how Dworkin’s …