Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 25 C.F.R. (1)
- BIA (1)
- CFR (1)
- Colorado (1)
- Congress (1)
-
- Double Jeopardy (1)
- Double Jeopardy Clause (1)
- Dual Sovereignty Doctrine (1)
- Exception (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Indian Country (1)
- Indian Law (1)
- Indian Reorganization Act (1)
- Law Review (1)
- Merle denezpi (1)
- Navajo (1)
- Prosecute (1)
- Public Lands and Resource (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Tenth circuit (1)
- Ute Mountain Ute (1)
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
W. Org. Res. Councils, Et Al. V. U.S. Bureau Of Land Mgmt., Sawyer J. Connelly, Sawyer J. Connelly
W. Org. Res. Councils, Et Al. V. U.S. Bureau Of Land Mgmt., Sawyer J. Connelly, Sawyer J. Connelly
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The United States District Court for the District of Montana granted Plaintiffs summary judgment against BLM and the State of Wyoming. The court ruled that BLM violated NEPA and the APA because it failed to consider alternative leasing programs and the broad downstream impacts of coal, oil, and gas leasing in two Powder River Basin resource management plans. This decision followed WORC I & II, in which the court remanded the same plans to BLM to correct deficiencies. Following BLM’s revisions, Plaintiffs again sued in this case, arguing the revisions were still deficient under NEPA.
West Virginia V. Epa, Amanda Spear, Amanda Spear
West Virginia V. Epa, Amanda Spear, Amanda Spear
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The EPA created the Clean Power Plan in an effort to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions generated by coal-fired power plants. The EPA determined that the Best System of Emission Reduction for existing coal-fired power plants included generation shifting methods, meaning a shift from coal to cleaner sources. The Supreme Court held, under the major questions doctrine, that Congress had not intended for the EPA to use generation shifting methods for the Best System of Emission Reduction and that the EPA had exceeded its authority in doing so. This note will explore how the decision may impact administrative …
Treaty-Based Climate Change Claims: Litigation Pathways In The Face Of Cultural Devastation, Kirsten D. Gerbatsch
Treaty-Based Climate Change Claims: Litigation Pathways In The Face Of Cultural Devastation, Kirsten D. Gerbatsch
Public Land & Resources Law Review
No abstract provided.
Do It For The Kids: Protecting Future Generations From Climate Change Impacts And Future Pandemics In Maryland Using An Environmental Rights Amendment, Johanna Adashek
Do It For The Kids: Protecting Future Generations From Climate Change Impacts And Future Pandemics In Maryland Using An Environmental Rights Amendment, Johanna Adashek
Public Land & Resources Law Review
No abstract provided.
Youth And Indigenous Voices In Climate Justice: Leveraging Best Practices From U.S. And Canadian Litigation, Randall S. Abate
Youth And Indigenous Voices In Climate Justice: Leveraging Best Practices From U.S. And Canadian Litigation, Randall S. Abate
Public Land & Resources Law Review
No abstract provided.
Water Justice Under The Big Sky: Locating A Human Right To Water In Montana Law, Abigail R. Brown
Water Justice Under The Big Sky: Locating A Human Right To Water In Montana Law, Abigail R. Brown
Public Land & Resources Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Judicial Duty: Interpreting And Enforcing Montanans' Inalienable Right To A Clean And Healthful Environment, Nate Bellinger, Roger Sullivan
A Judicial Duty: Interpreting And Enforcing Montanans' Inalienable Right To A Clean And Healthful Environment, Nate Bellinger, Roger Sullivan
Public Land & Resources Law Review
No abstract provided.
Preview — Denezpi V. United States (2022). Double Jeopardy In Indian Country, Paul A. Hutton Iii
Preview — Denezpi V. United States (2022). Double Jeopardy In Indian Country, Paul A. Hutton Iii
Public Land & Resources Law Review
On February 22, the Supreme Court of the United States will decide the single issue of whether a Court of Indian Offenses constitutes a federal entity and, therefore, separate prosecutions in federal district court and a Court of Indian Offenses for the same act violates the Double Jeopardy Clause as prosecutions for the same offense.