A district court dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction a lawsuit concerning an advisory committee on hunting chartered by DOI under the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Nonprofit groups argued that the Department failed to properly charter the committee, failed to balance its membership t...
A district court held that William Perry Pendley was unlawfully serving as the acting director of BLM. The governor of Montana and the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation argued that Pendley was unlawfully serving as the acting director in violation of the Appointments Clause, t...
As companies increase their environmental, social, governance (ESG) reporting and statements in response to market and shareholder demands, plaintiffs have pursued with growing success legal challenges to company claims and disclosures related to ESG performance. Similarly, inventive theories are being put forward to directly attack companies for alleged ESG-related performance and operational deficiencies. In both arenas, there has been a recent growth in efforts to hold companies accountable for supplier misconduct.
This October Term, the U.S. Supreme Court will be asked to weigh in on three and possibly all four of its pending original jurisdiction controversies over interstate waters. The Court’s past judgments and opinions have established little in the way of “federal common law” governing the states’ interests in shared waters. But they have established this much: these interests vest in states-as-states directly under the U.S. Constitution, even if the Court itself is reluctant to specify the interests with much precision or to enjoin violations thereof.