Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Environmental Law (23)
- Natural Resources Law (14)
- Administrative Law (12)
- Land Use Law (9)
- Water Law (8)
-
- Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law (7)
- State and Local Government Law (6)
- Animal Law (4)
- Energy and Utilities Law (4)
- Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law (4)
- Property Law and Real Estate (4)
- Agency (3)
- Torts (3)
- Agriculture Law (2)
- Civil Procedure (2)
- Common Law (2)
- Contracts (2)
- Law and Race (2)
- Life Sciences (2)
- Supreme Court of the United States (2)
- Agriculture (1)
- Business Organizations Law (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Construction Law (1)
- Courts (1)
- Earth Sciences (1)
- Environmental Health (1)
- Environmental Health and Protection (1)
- Environmental Sciences (1)
- Keyword
-
- Environmental Protection Agency (5)
- Clean Air Act (4)
- EPA (4)
- Mining (4)
- Water (4)
-
- Clean Water Act (3)
- Indian Law (3)
- Ninth Circuit (3)
- Species (3)
- Tribal (3)
- Administrative Law (2)
- Agency (2)
- BLM (2)
- CWA (2)
- ESA (2)
- Endangered (2)
- Environment (2)
- Environmental (2)
- Extinction (2)
- Groundwater (2)
- Habitat (2)
- Montana (2)
- Prior appropriation (2)
- Property (2)
- Sovereignty (2)
- Tribal sovereignty (2)
- Tribe (2)
- Water rights (2)
- West Virginia (2)
- Wyoming (2)
Articles 1 - 30 of 31
Full-Text Articles in Law
Herr V. U.S. Forest Service, Peter B. Taylor
Herr V. U.S. Forest Service, Peter B. Taylor
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Herr v. U. S. Forest Service, the Sixth Circuit ruled on whether the Forest Service could infringe on pre-existing private property rights held adjacent to a designated Wilderness Area. The Herrs purchased lakefront property adjacent to the Sylvania Wilderness in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan with the intention of using their littoral rights for recreational boating. The Sylvania Wilderness was created under the Michigan Wilderness Act in 1987, but the Act observed valid existing rights. The court found that the Herrs’ littoral rights were recognizable “valid existing rights.” Therefore, the Forest Service’s restriction of those rights was illegal.
Mays V. City Of Flint, Michigan, Nathan A. Burke
Mays V. City Of Flint, Michigan, Nathan A. Burke
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Mays v. City of Flint Michigan, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality employees removed a class action against them in the Michigan state court to federal court under the federal-officer removal statute. This court ruled in favor of the residents of Flint, determining that the federal officer removal statute did not give the federal court jurisdiction over a state agency simply because the agency must follow federal rules. The court held that Michigan Department of Environmental Quality employees could not have been “acting under” the federal government even though the state agency’s enforcement authority could be trumped by the …
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 …
Clean Air Council V. Pruitt, Oliver Wood
Clean Air Council V. Pruitt, Oliver Wood
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia granted a motion for summary vacatur against the Environmental Protection Agency after environmental groups challenged the agency’s reconsideration of the Obama-era methane rule under the Clean Air Act. The court held that the EPA unlawfully issued a stay after it reconsidered the rule without proper authorization. The court vacated the EPA’s stay, one example of the Trump Administration unsuccessfully repealing Obama-era rulemaking.
Atay V. County Of Maui, Stephanie A. George
Atay V. County Of Maui, Stephanie A. George
Public Land & Resources Law Review
As genetically engineered plants become more common, questions frequently arise regarding how the plants are regulated and who can regulate them. The Ninth Circuit attempted to answer these questions through preemption doctrine. The court left the door open for states and localities to regulate genetically engineered crops that have been deregulated by the federal government. This decision will implicate the future cultivation of genetically engineered crops, and the food industry as a whole.
City Of Helena V. Community Of Rimini, Molly M. Kelly
City Of Helena V. Community Of Rimini, Molly M. Kelly
Public Land & Resources Law Review
After twenty years of adjudication, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed the City of Helena’s right to 13.75 cfs from Ten Mile Creek, the city’s primary water source. The Court found a statute allowing cities and municipalities to exercise water rights that have gone through extended periods of nonuse did not need a retroactive clause.
United States V. Gila Valley Irrigation District, Ryan L. Hickey
United States V. Gila Valley Irrigation District, Ryan L. Hickey
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Attempts to alter water use agreements, especially those spanning back decades or even centuries, elicit intense scrutiny from water rights holders. In United States v. Gila Valley Irrigation Dist., the Ninth Circuit upheld application of a 1935 Decree apportioning water among various regional entities, including two Indian tribes, to bar a mineral company from transferring water rights between properties within the Gila River drainage.
Murray Energy Corporation V. Administrator Of Environmental Protection Agency, Peter B. Taylor
Murray Energy Corporation V. Administrator Of Environmental Protection Agency, Peter B. Taylor
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Congress amended the Clean Air Act in 1977 because of public concern that enforcement of the Clean Air Act would have adverse effects on employment. Section 321(a) tasks the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency with a continuous duty to evaluate the potential employment impact of the administration and enforcement of the Clean Air Act. In Murray Energy Corporation v. Administrator of Environmental Protection Agency, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled on whether the federal court’s authority to review and enforce non-discretionary Clean Air Act duties extended to the EPA’s Section 321(a) duty to continuously …
Agua Caliente Band Of Cahuilla Indians V. Coachella Valley Water Dist., Rebecca Newsom
Agua Caliente Band Of Cahuilla Indians V. Coachella Valley Water Dist., Rebecca Newsom
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. Coachella Valley Water Dist., the Ninth Circuit upheld the Tribe’s federal reserved right to the groundwater underlying its reservation. This decision enforces that the courts will not defer to state water law when there is an established federal reserved water right. Further, the Ninth Circuit expressly extended this right to groundwater.
Center For Biological Diversity V. Jewell, Lowell J. Chandler
Center For Biological Diversity V. Jewell, Lowell J. Chandler
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The ESA protects threatened or endangered species, and species likely to become threatened or endangered within the foreseeable future, throughout all or a significant portion of their range. In Center for Biological Diversity v. Jewell, the United States District Court for the District of Arizona overturned a Fish and Wildlife Service policy defining the significant portion of range language in the ESA. The policy interpretation limited ESA protections to apply only when a species faced risk of extinction throughout its entire range. The court deemed this policy impermissible because it effectively rendered the significant portion of range language meaningless. …
Murr V. Wisconsin, Nathan A. Burke
Murr V. Wisconsin, Nathan A. Burke
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Murr v. Wisconsin, the Court redefined how to determine private property for a regulatory taking under the Fifth Amendment. Previously, courts have primarily relied on state property principles to determine the relevant unit of property for a regulatory takings claim. However, in this case, the Court adopted a three-factor standard to determine the landowner’s reasonable expectations regarding the treatment of their property. By relying on these factors rather than only on state laws, the Court created a litigation-specific definition of property that could potentially differ from state property boundaries. The three-factor standard may also give the government an …
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.
Lewis V. Clarke, Summer L. Carmack
Lewis V. Clarke, Summer L. Carmack
Public Land & Resources Law Review
One manner in which Indian tribes exercise their inherent sovereignty is by asserting sovereign immunity. In Lewis v. Clarke, the Court decided that the sovereign immunity extended to instrumentalities of tribes did not further extend to tribal employees acting within the scope of their employment. The Court acknowledged the concerns of the lower court, namely, the possibility of setting a precedent allowing future plaintiffs to sidestep a tribe’s sovereign immunity by suing a tribal employee in his individual capacity. However, the Supreme Court ultimately felt that the immunity of tribal employees should not exceed the immunity extended to state …
Whatcom County V. Hirst, Et Al, Stephanie A. George
Whatcom County V. Hirst, Et Al, Stephanie A. George
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Upending decades of common practice in water management and building in the state of Washington, the Washington Supreme Court found Whatcom County violated the state’s Growth Management Act. Whatcom County used the Department of Ecology’s Nooksack Rule in evaluating permits for buildings and subdivisions that rely on permit-exempt wells. This decision affects families across the state of Washington.
Yazzie V. Epa, Caitlin Buzzas
Yazzie V. Epa, Caitlin Buzzas
Public Land & Resources Law Review
No abstract provided.
Defenders Of Wildlife V. Zinke, Jacob R. Schwaller
Defenders Of Wildlife V. Zinke, Jacob R. Schwaller
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Wyoming was the final holdout of protections for wolves under the Endangered Species Act, and a recent decision by the United States Circuit for the District of Columbia has finally overturned those protections. After years of court battles, this decision marks the final adjudication removing federal protections, and places the management of the wolves in the Greater Yellowstone Area back in the hands of the states surrounding Yellowstone National Park. Complete deference to state regulatory systems may be a new trend in the adjudication of cases under the ESA, and this case could have significant impacts on future deference given …
Catskill Mountains Chapter Of Trout Unlimited, Inc. V. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Benjamin W. Almy
Catskill Mountains Chapter Of Trout Unlimited, Inc. V. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Benjamin W. Almy
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Trout Unlimited’s effort to overturn the EPA’s Water Transfers Rule was stifled by the Second Circuit. The court’s comprehensive Chevron analysis determined that while the NPDES Water Transfers Rule may be at odds with the Clean Water Act’s mission, it was based on a reasonable interpretation of the statute’s ambiguous language, and therefore it did not violate the Administrative Procedures Act.
United States V. Barthelmess Ranch Corp., Jonah P. Brown
United States V. Barthelmess Ranch Corp., Jonah P. Brown
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Application of water to a beneficial use is the decisive element of a perfected water right in Montana. The BLM claimed rights to five reservoirs and one natural pothole under Montana law. The agency did not own livestock, but instead made the water available to grazing permittees. In United States v. Barthelmess Ranch Corp., the Montana Supreme Court affirmed the Montana Water Court’s holding that the BLM’s practice of making water available to others constituted a beneficial use and a perfected water right.
Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition V. Fola Coal Company, Llc, Emily A. Slike
Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition V. Fola Coal Company, Llc, Emily A. Slike
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Disregarding CWA regulations, WVDEP allowed for a state coal mining company, Fola, to discharge pollutants into the Stillhouse Branch without regard for water quality violations. Fola claimed that because it held a WV/NPDES permit, it was shielded from any liability so long as the company followed the permit’s provisions, even if its discharge violated CWA water quality standards.
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.
Lewis V. Clarke, Lillian M. Alvernaz
Lewis V. Clarke, Lillian M. Alvernaz
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The nation to nation relationship between tribes and the federal government is unique. Within that relationship, the federal government acknowledges and respects tribal sovereignty. An important aspect of sovereignty is sovereign immunity. Lewis v. Clarke confronts the applicability of sovereign immunity through an extension of tribal sovereignty over an employee defendant. After having heard oral argument, the United States Supreme Court could either reaffirm or severely limit the applicability of tribal sovereign immunity to “arms” of a tribe. While the lower court analyzed tribal sovereign immunity by considering the damages sought, the Supreme Court opinion portends to extend far beyond …
Earthreports, Inc. V. Ferc, Caitlin Buzzas
Earthreports, Inc. V. Ferc, Caitlin Buzzas
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In EarthReports, Inc. v. FERC the Court ruled that when a state challenges a liquefied natural gas (“LNG”) export project, this should target the Department of Energy, not the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
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.
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe V. U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers, Jody D. Lowenstein
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe V. U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers, Jody D. Lowenstein
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Standing Rock Sioux’s effort to enjoin the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ permitting of an oil pipeline was stifled by the United States District Court of the District of Columbia. In denying the preliminary injunction, the court held that the Tribe failed to show that the Corps violated the National Historic Preservation Act, and that the Tribe’s belated effort to litigate was futile after failing to participate in the consultation process.
Alaska Oil & Gas Association V. Pritzker, Benjamin W. Almy
Alaska Oil & Gas Association V. Pritzker, Benjamin W. Almy
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Alaska Oil & Gas Association v. Pritzker, the Ninth Circuit reversed the United States District Court for the District of Alaska’s decision to strike down the National Marine Fisheries Service’s (“NMFS”) listing of distinct population segments of the Pacific bearded seal. The court determined that the NMFS was in full compliance with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act and squarely rejected the district court’s demand for highly specific data pertaining to the projected effects of climate change on the bearded seal.
The Clark Fork Coalition V. Tubbs, Jonah P. Brown
The Clark Fork Coalition V. Tubbs, Jonah P. Brown
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Before landowners may appropriate groundwater in Montana, they must first apply for a DNRC permit pursuant to the Montana Water Use Act. Landowners may qualify for an exemption from the arduous permitting process if their appropriation meets certain criteria. However, the Act provides an exception to the exemption when a “combined appropriation” from the same source is in excess of ten acre-feet per year. The Clark Fork Coalition v. Tubbs affirmed the district court’s invalidation of the DNRC rule defining “combined appropriation” to only include physically connected groundwater wells.
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.
Safari Club International V. Jewell, Jacob Schwaller
Safari Club International V. Jewell, Jacob Schwaller
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Safari Club International and the National Rifle Association brought this challenge to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s suspension of elephant trophy imports from 2014 forward. Both parties brought cross motions for summary judgment. In a recent memorandum opinion, the D.C. Federal District Court found that, although there was a minor procedural error on the part of the Service, an extended ban on Zimbabwean elephant trophies by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was in large part compliant with their mandate under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna and the Endangered Species Act. …
Wyoming V. United States Department Of The Interior, Arie R. Mielkus
Wyoming V. United States Department Of The Interior, Arie R. Mielkus
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Responding to an overpopulation of wild horses on the BLM lands in the state, Wyoming sued the Secretary of the Interior and the BLM for failure to manage the excess numbers. Wyoming’s claim, based on the Wild Horses and Burros Act and Administrative Procedure Act, jumped the gun by bringing it before the BLM made its determination that removal was necessary to manage the overpopulation.
Akiachak Native Community V. United States Department Of Interior, Lillian M. Alvernaz
Akiachak Native Community V. United States Department Of Interior, Lillian M. Alvernaz
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Alaska Native Tribes have long been classified differently than the federally recognized Indian tribes in the rest of the country. The Akiachak decision contributes to the shifting treatment of Alaska Native Tribes and clarifies their relationship with the federal government. The ability to put land into trust is essential to the protection of generations to come and the exercise of sovereign authority. By enabling Alaska Native tribes the ability to petition to put tribally owned fee land in trust, the DOI promotes and encourages tribal self-governance and empowerment.