The court holds that a developer's takings claim against the United States is barred by 28 U.S.C. §2501's six-year statute of limitations. Two developers claim that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' denial of a permit application to construct a levee, and the Corps' subsequent selection of an alter...
The court upholds the U.S. Department of the Interior's (DOI's) decision to deny lessors' request to cancel their Native American oil and gas lease because of the lessee's royalty underpayment violations. The court first holds that the lessors' constitutional argument is meritless. Instead of arguin...
The court holds that the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA) preempts state and local environmental review of a rail carrier's reacquisition and reopening of the Stampede Pass railroad line in Washington State. The court first holds that the plain language of two sections of the I...
The court holds that the Eleventh Amendment does not bar the removal from state to federal court of a power plant's federal and state claims against a state environmental agency. The power plant filed claims in state court against state and county environmental agencies after they claimed that the p...
The court holds that a Maine town's solid waste flow-control ordinance, coupled with its grant of an exclusive hauling and disposal contract to a local contractor, does not violate the dormant U.S. Commerce Clause. The court first holds that the town's ordinance does not discriminate on its face aga...
The court holds that congressional representatives lack standing to sue to enjoin implementation of the President's American Heritage Rivers Initiative, which was established by executive order. The representatives claim that by issuing the Executive Order, the president denied them their proper rol...
The court upholds the decision of a land use board that remanded a county's decision to allow a city-run wastewater treatment plant to operate on land zoned for exclusive farm use (EFU). The county approved the use as one that is permitted outright on land zoned for EFU. The court first holds that c...
The court holds that property owners operated two illegal junkyards in violation of a city's zoning laws and that such operation constituted a nuisance. The city planning commission determined that the properties were nuisances, and the commission's decision to uphold the city's cease and desist ord...
The U.S. Supreme Court holds that a Native American tribe's and U.S. claims to additional water rights from the Colorado River are not precluded by a previous Court decision or by a 1983 consent decree entered into by the United States and the tribe. The tribe's and the government's present claims a...
Editors' Summary: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on three takings cases in its 2004 term: Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.; Kelo v. City of New London; and San Remo Hotel, Ltd. Partnership v. City & County of San Francisco. In Lingle, the Court struck down the "substantially advance" test set forth in Agins v. City of Tiburon. Kelo, which gained attention from the media and public, upheld the use of eminent domain for economic development purposes. And San Remo involved a relatively straightforward procedural issue.