Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Adjudicatory jurisdiction (1)
- And welfare of a tribe (1)
- Annual fee (1)
- Appalachian Trail (1)
- Atlantic Coast Pipeline (1)
-
- CERCLA (1)
- Catastrophic (1)
- Clean-up permit (1)
- Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liabilities Act (1)
- Consent (1)
- Consent decree (1)
- Containment program (1)
- Declaratory judgement (1)
- District court (1)
- Dolgencorp (1)
- Dollar General (1)
- Due process (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)
- Fine (1)
- First Montana exception (1)
- Gas pipeline (1)
- Harm (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
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 …
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents
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 …
2001 Supreme Court Redux, Mary Stevens
2001 Supreme Court Redux, Mary Stevens
Sustainable Development Law & Policy
No abstract provided.
In Memory Of Professor James E. Bond, Janet Ainsworth
In Memory Of Professor James E. Bond, Janet Ainsworth
Seattle University Law Review
Janet Ainsworth, Professor of Law at Seattle University School of Law: In Memory of Professor James E. Bond.
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents