The court holds that a federal statutory requirement that holders of unpatented mining claims pay $100 per claim in 1993 and 1994 or else forfeit their claims did not effect an uncompensated taking of claimholders' property in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The fee replac...

The court holds that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did not violate the U.S. Constitution's Tenth Amendment or Spending Clause by imposing Clean Air Act (CAA) offset and highway sanctions against Missouri for its failure to properly implement its state implementation plan (SIP). The ...

The court holds that when the state of New Jersey acts in its sovereign capacity to invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court to assert state-law claims against a waste hauler and its customers, it waives its Eleventh Amendment immunity with respect to contribution claims by third-party plaintiffs ...

The court holds that a county's imposition of conditions on commercial developers' master plan for three parcels of property did not violate the developers' rights to substantive due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The court first holds that the ...

The court holds that the Price-Anderson Amendments Act of 1988's choice-of-law provision mandates the retroactive application of Pennsylvania's two-year statute of limitations to bar the claims of 42 plaintiffs filed in Mississippi State and federal court for injuries allegedly caused by the Three M...

The court holds that a county's rezoning of a landowner's beachfront property from residential to private airport use and leasing of the property to an airport tenant was not an unconstitutional taking or a violation of the landowner's substantive due process rights. The court first holds that the c...

The court holds that salvage timber sales that had not yet been advertised were "in preparation" under the Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Assistance and Rescissions Act's (Rescissions Act's) waiver of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements. Environmental groups challenged th...

The court holds that Ohio statutes and regulations restricting commercial fishing of walleye and yellow perch do not violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The court first holds that the statutes and regulations are not examples of simple economic protectionism. They do not distinguis...

The court holds that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) does not require the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to consider the master plan for an airport's expansion in an environmental assessment (EA) of the upgrade of one runway. The court first holds that the issue is not moot, even...

The court holds that legislation applying the Arizona-Idaho Conservation Act exemption from Endangered Species Act (ESA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements to the construction of an observatory on a site in endangered red squirrel habitat does not violate the separation of pow...