Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Advisory Opinions By Federal Courts, Phillip M. Kannan
Advisory Opinions By Federal Courts, Phillip M. Kannan
University of Richmond Law Review
Since 1793, the affirmative grant of authority to federal courts in Article III of the Constitution to hear and decide cases or controversies has been interpreted to prohibit these courts from giving advisory opinions. In that year, United States Supreme Court Chief Justice Jay, Justice Cushing, and District Judge Duane rejected a provision in a 1792 act of Congress that would have required the Supreme Court to settle federal pension claims of widows and orphans subject to the approval of the Secretary of War. The basis for the position taken by the Chief Justice was "that neither the legislative nor …
Agency Action, Finality And Geographical Nexus: Judicial Review Of Agency Compliance With Nepa's Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Requirement After Lujan V. National Wildlife Federation, Matthew C. Porterfield
Agency Action, Finality And Geographical Nexus: Judicial Review Of Agency Compliance With Nepa's Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Requirement After Lujan V. National Wildlife Federation, Matthew C. Porterfield
University of Richmond Law Review
In recent years, there has been an increasing recognition of the need to address the complex and interrelated impacts that result from human interaction with the environment. One of the most effective tools for evaluating these impacts has been the preparation of programmatic environmental impact statements (EISs) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The status of programmatic EISs, however, has been called into question by the Supreme Court's decision in Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation, which has been interpreted by numerous commentators as heralding the end of "programmatic" environmental lawsuits. Even more significantly, Lujan has been …