Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 705 (1)
- APA (1)
- Army Corps of Engineers (1)
- BLM (1)
- Big Horn Electric Cooperative (1)
-
- California (1)
- Clean Water Act (1)
- Comity (1)
- Court of Federal Claims (1)
- Crow Indian Tribe (1)
- Crow Reservation (1)
- Department of Defense (1)
- Dolan (1)
- EPA (1)
- Exactions (1)
- Exclusive jurisdiction (1)
- Federal Circuit (1)
- Federal courts of appeals (1)
- Federal district court (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Knick (1)
- Knick v. Township of Scott (1)
- Koontz (1)
- Land use (1)
- Martin (1)
- Martin v. United States (1)
- National Association of Manufacturers (1)
- Nollan (1)
- Revised Statute 2477 (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Big Horn County Electric Cooperative, Inc. V. Big Man, Brett Berntsen
Big Horn County Electric Cooperative, Inc. V. Big Man, Brett Berntsen
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The tribal exhaustion doctrine requires that parties first exhaust available tribal court remedies before challenging tribal jurisdiction in federal court. Exactly what constitutes an exhaustion of tribal court remedies, however, remains riddled with nuance. In Big Horn County Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Big Man, the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana rejected a U.S. magistrate judge’s recommendation to remand a case to tribal court to further develop the factual record. Instead, the district court relied on federal circuit court precedent in holding that exhaustion had occurred when the tribal appellate court expressly ruled on the case’s jurisdiction …
Martin V. United States, Mitch L. Werbell V
Martin V. United States, Mitch L. Werbell V
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Martin v. United States, the Federal Circuit Court dismissed a Fifth Amendment regulatory takings and exaction claim for want of ripeness when the claimant failed to apply for a permit, which would have allowed for an assessment of the cost of compliance with governmentally imposed requirements. By finding the claim unripe, the court stood firm on the historical view that federal courts may only adjudicate land-use regulatory takings and inverse condemnation claims on the merits after a regulating entity has made a final decision. However, jurisprudential evolution of the ripeness doctrine and judicial review of takings claims may …
National Association Of Manufacturers V. Department Of Defense, Summer L. Carmack
National Association Of Manufacturers V. Department Of Defense, Summer L. Carmack
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In an attempt to provide consistency to the interpretation and application of the statutory phrase “waters of the United States,” as used in the Clean Water Act, the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers together passed the WOTUS Rule. Unfortunately, the Rule has created more confusion than clarity, resulting in a number of lawsuits challenging substantive portions of the Rule’s language. National Association of Manufacturers v. Department of Defense did not address those substantive challenges, but instead determined whether those claims challenging the Rule must be filed in federal district courts or federal courts of appeals. In its decision, the …
California V. United States Bureau Of Land Management, Molly M. Kelly
California V. United States Bureau Of Land Management, Molly M. Kelly
Public Land & Resources Law Review
After President Trump’s Executive Order No. 13783 encouraging relaxing regulatory burdens on energy production, the Bureau of Land Management reevaluated its 2016 “Waste Prevention Rule” which addressed waste of natural gas from venting, flaring, or other leaks resulting from oil and natural gas production activities. The BLM sought to postpone the Rule’s compliance date to give the agency time to promulgate a new rule—effectively overruling the 2016 Rule. Plaintiffs challenged the agency’s compliance under the Administrative Procedures Act, and the court found the BLM did not properly follow APA requirements.