Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Environmental Law (11)
- Natural Resources Law (9)
- Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law (9)
- Administrative Law (8)
- Energy and Utilities Law (7)
-
- Land Use Law (6)
- Water Law (6)
- Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law (4)
- Science and Technology Law (4)
- Agriculture Law (3)
- Animal Law (3)
- Cultural Heritage Law (3)
- Law and Race (2)
- State and Local Government Law (2)
- Civil Procedure (1)
- Common Law (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Contracts (1)
- Courts (1)
- Environmental Health (1)
- Estates and Trusts (1)
- Government Contracts (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Legal Remedies (1)
- Life Sciences (1)
- Natural Law (1)
- Nonprofit Organizations Law (1)
- Pharmacology, Toxicology and Environmental Health (1)
- President/Executive Department (1)
Articles 1 - 12 of 12
Full-Text Articles in Law
Ctr. For Biological Diversity V. United States Fish & Wildlife Serv., Ali Stapleton
Ctr. For Biological Diversity V. United States Fish & Wildlife Serv., Ali Stapleton
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court of Arizona’s decision to deny a proposed mining plan becuase the operations exceeded the boundaries of a valid mining claim. The issue the court addressed is whether a permanent occupancy of waste rock and tailings on land, absent the discovery of valuable minerals, is a reasonable use related to mining activities. The Ninth Circuit decision effectively prevented mining companies from amending the 1872 Mining Law on the administrative record. Motions for a rehearing and a rehearing en banc were denied.
Preview—Park County Environmental Council V. Montana Department Of Environmental Quality: A Test Of Montana’S Right To A Clean And Healthful Environment, Liz M. Forster
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Supreme Court of Montana will hear oral arguments in this matter on Wednesday, September 30, 2020, at 9:30 a.m. in the Mazurek Justice Building in Helena, Montana. This case challenges a key provision of Montana’s bedrock environmental law—the Montana Environmental Policy Act (“MEPA”)—and tests the judicial power of the state’s constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment to issue injunctions to prevent environmental harm.
Montana Environmental Information Center V. Department Of Environmental Quality, Anthony P. Reed
Montana Environmental Information Center V. Department Of Environmental Quality, Anthony P. Reed
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The DEQ renewed a 1999 MPDES Permit on September 14, 2012 that allowed Western Energy Company to discharge pollutants from the Rosebud Mine into streams. Environmental groups MEIC and the Sierra Club sued, arguing this violated both the Montana Water Quality Act and federal Clean Water Act because the DEQ’s interpretation of its own regulations that exempted waters with ephemeral characteristics from water quality standards was arbitrary and capricious. The district court agreed, but the Montana Supreme Court reversed. It held the DEQ’s interpretation was lawful and remanded for further fact finding to assess how the DEQ applied the interpretation …
Wildearth Guardians V. Zinke, Emily M. Mcculloch
Wildearth Guardians V. Zinke, Emily M. Mcculloch
Public Land & Resources Law Review
WildEarth Guardians v. Zinke marks an important decision prompting the Bureau of Land Management to seriously consider greenhouse gas emissions when performing environmental assessments for oil and gas leasing. WildEarth Guardians and Physicians for Social Responsibility, two non-profit organizations, asserted BLM improperly failed to recognize greenhouse gas emissions and their impacts on climate change when issuing oil and gas leases in three western states. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia agreed, finding that by failing to take a hard look at environmental impacts from its leasing decisions, BLM violated the National Environmental Policy Act’s requirements.
Western Organization Of Resource Councils V. United States Bureau Of Land Management, Seth Sivinski
Western Organization Of Resource Councils V. United States Bureau Of Land Management, Seth Sivinski
Public Land & Resources Law Review
To what extent must the BLM analyze potential climate change impacts where millions of acres of public lands and federal mineral estates are being considered for coal development? Western Organization of Resource Councils v. BLM addresses this, setting the scope for NEPA-mandated environmental impact analysis and reasonable alternative consideration by federal agencies. Judge Brian Morris of the District of Montana eschewed BLM’s assertions that considering climate impacts would be speculative, instead requiring BLM to acknowledge scientific reality and include modern climate science in its NEPA review analysis.
Montana Environmental Information Center V. U.S. Office Of Surface Mining, Lowell J. Chandler
Montana Environmental Information Center V. U.S. Office Of Surface Mining, Lowell J. Chandler
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In MEIC v. U.S. Office of Surface Mining, the cost of coal mining’s climate impacts and the agency’s NEPA review obligations are at issue. The United States District Court for the District of Montana found that the Office of Surface Mining and Enforcement failed to adequately consider the need for an EIS and to take a hard look at the indirect, cumulative, and foreseeable impacts of a proposed coal mine expansion in central Montana. In its NEPA analysis, the court concluded that if the benefits of a carbon-intensive project are quantified, then the costs to the climate should be …
United States V. Osage Wind, Llc, Summer Carmack
United States V. Osage Wind, Llc, Summer Carmack
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Osage Nation, as owner of the beneficial interest in its mineral estate, issues federally-approved leases to persons and entities who wish to conduct mineral development on its lands. After an energy-development company, Osage Wind, leased privately-owned surface lands within Tribal reservation boundaries and began to excavate minerals for purposes of constructing a wind farm, the United States brought suit on the Tribe’s behalf. In the ensuing litigation, the Osage Nation insisted that Osage Wind should have obtained a mineral lease from the Tribe before beginning its work. In its decision, the Tenth Circuit applied one of the Indian law …
Save Our Cabinets V. U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Jaclyn Van Natta
Save Our Cabinets V. U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Jaclyn Van Natta
Public Land & Resources Law Review
No abstract provided.
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.
Great Basin Resource Watch V. Bureau Of Land Management, Jody D. Lowenstein
Great Basin Resource Watch V. Bureau Of Land Management, Jody D. Lowenstein
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Great Basin Resource Watch v. Bureau of Land Management, the Ninth Circuit invalidated the BLM’s environmental review, finding that the agency based its approval of a mining project on unsupported reasoning, inaccurate information, and deficient analysis. In negating the action, the court held that the BLM failed to take the hard look required by the National Environmental Policy Act.
United States V. Ohio, Hannah R. Seifert
United States V. Ohio, Hannah R. Seifert
Public Land & Resources Law Review
United States v. Ohio is a concise example of the judiciary’s decisive role in ascertaining the intention of parties to an agreement. Relying primarily on the original documents memorializing a cost-sharing agreement to discern intent, the court invalidated two subsurface mining leases entered into between Ohio and Buckingham Coal Company for lack of prior federal approval. The court determined that requiring pre-approval for any lease involving Project lands was consistent with the foundational and foremost purpose of the Project to control flooding.
Wildearth Guardians V. United States Office Of Surface Mining, Reclamation And Enforcement, Erick A. Valencia
Wildearth Guardians V. United States Office Of Surface Mining, Reclamation And Enforcement, Erick A. Valencia
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Colorado District Court in WildEarth Guardians v. United States Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement ordered the United States Office of Surface Mining to reevaluate the environmental impact of an approved mining modification plan for the Colowyo Mine after the Office failed to involve the public in the approval process and did not take a “hard look” at the modification’s effects on the environment as required by NEPA. Even though the Office of Surface Mining also approved the Trapper Mine’s modification plan without fulfilling NEPA’s requirements, WildEarth Guardians was left without a remedy regarding that mine because the …