Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Preview—United States V. Cooley: What Will Happen To The Thinnest Blue Line?, Jo J. Phippin
Preview—United States V. Cooley: What Will Happen To The Thinnest Blue Line?, Jo J. Phippin
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Supreme Court of the United States ("Supreme Court") will hear oral arguments in this matter on Tuesday, March 23, 2021. This case presents the narrow issue of whether a tribal police officer has the authority to investigate and detain a non-Indian on a public right-of-way within a reservation for a suspected violation of state or federal law. The lower courts, holding that tribes have no such authority, granted James Cooley’s motion to suppress evidence. The Supreme Court must decide whether the lower courts erred in so deciding. While the issue before the Supreme Court is itself narrow, it has …
Preview—Murray V. Bej Minerals, Llc: Finding A Home For Fossils, Layne L. Ryerson
Preview—Murray V. Bej Minerals, Llc: Finding A Home For Fossils, Layne L. Ryerson
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Montana Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in this matter on Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 9:30 AM in the courtroom of the Montana Supreme Court, Joseph P. Mazurek Building, Helena, Montana. The Honorable Olivia Rieger will hear the case in place of Justice Jim Rice, who recused himself. Eric B. Wolff is expected to argue for the Appellants. Harlan B. Krogh is expected to argue for the Appellees.
Center For Biological Diversity V. Zinke, Ryan Hickey
Center For Biological Diversity V. Zinke, Ryan Hickey
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The oft-cited “arbitrary and capricious” standard revived the Center for Biological Diversity’s most recent legal challenge in its decades-long quest to see arctic grayling listed under the Endangered Species Act. While this Ninth Circuit decision did not grant grayling ESA protections, it did require the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to reconsider its 2014 finding that listing grayling as threatened or endangered was unwarranted. In doing so, the court found “range,” as used in the ESA, vague while endorsing the FWS’s 2014 clarification of that term. Finally, this holding identified specific shortcomings of the challenged FWS finding, highlighting how …
Friends Of Animals V. United States Fish & Wildlife Service, Bradley E. Tinker
Friends Of Animals V. United States Fish & Wildlife Service, Bradley E. Tinker
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Friends of Animals v. United States Fish & Wildlife Service, the Ninth Circuit held that the plain language of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act allows for the removal of one species of bird to benefit another species. Friends of Animals argued that the Service’s experiment permitting the taking of one species––the barred owl––to advance the conservation of a different species––the northern spotted owl––violated the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The court, however, found that the Act delegates broad implementing discretion to the Secretary of the Interior, and neither the Act nor the underlying international conventions limit the taking of …
United States V. Gila Valley Irrigation District, Ryan L. Hickey
United States V. Gila Valley Irrigation District, Ryan L. Hickey
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Attempts to alter water use agreements, especially those spanning back decades or even centuries, elicit intense scrutiny from water rights holders. In United States v. Gila Valley Irrigation Dist., the Ninth Circuit upheld application of a 1935 Decree apportioning water among various regional entities, including two Indian tribes, to bar a mineral company from transferring water rights between properties within the Gila River drainage.