Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Environmental Law (2)
- State and Local Government Law (2)
- Administrative Law (1)
- Earth Sciences (1)
- Energy and Utilities Law (1)
-
- Environmental Health (1)
- Environmental Health and Protection (1)
- Environmental Sciences (1)
- Geology (1)
- Health Law and Policy (1)
- Labor and Employment Law (1)
- Land Use Law (1)
- Law and Economics (1)
- Legal Studies (1)
- Life Sciences (1)
- Mineral Physics (1)
- Natural Resource Economics (1)
- Oil, Gas, and Energy (1)
- Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law (1)
- Pharmacology, Toxicology and Environmental Health (1)
- Physical Sciences and Mathematics (1)
- Social Welfare Law (1)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Water Law (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Hawkes Co. V. United States Army Corps Of Engineers, Sarah M. Danno
Hawkes Co. V. United States Army Corps Of Engineers, Sarah M. Danno
Public Land & Resources Law Review
A peat mining company will not be required to obtain a permit under the Clean Water Act to discharge dredged and fill material into wetlands. The United States District Court for the District of Minnesota held that the United States Army Corps of Engineers fell short in its attempts to establish jurisdiction over the wetlands by twice failing to show a significant nexus existed between the wetlands and navigable waters. Further, the district court enjoined the Corps from asserting jurisdiction a third time because it would force the mining company through a “never ending loop” of administrative law.
Murray Energy Corporation V. Mccarthy, Sarah M. Danno
Murray Energy Corporation V. Mccarthy, Sarah M. Danno
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Holding that the widespread effects of environmental regulation on the coal industry constituted sufficient importance, the Northern District of West Virginia ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to conduct analysis on employment loss and plant reduction resulting from regulatory effects. In admonishing the EPA’s inaction, the court ruled that the Agency had a non-discretionary duty to evaluate employment and plant reduction. Furthermore, the court held that the EPA’s attempt to put forth general reports in place of required evaluations was an invalid attempt to circumvent its statutory duty.
National Wildlife Federation V. National Marine Fisheries Service, Jacob R. Schwaller
National Wildlife Federation V. National Marine Fisheries Service, Jacob R. Schwaller
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The tide in the legal battle surrounding anadromous fish protections in the Columbia River watershed most recently swung in favor of the fish. In the latest iteration of National Wildlife Federation v. National Marine Fisheries Service, the Court found in a lengthy opinion that NOAA fisheries acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it issued its 2014 BiOp concluding that the FCRPS did not violate the ESA. The Court also ruled that the Corps violated NEPA by failing to prepare an environmental impact statement in connection with their records of decision implementing reasonable and prudent alternatives in the BiOp. This decision could …