A California appellate court reversed in part a lower court decision granting a petition to vacate an irrigation district's approval of an agreement to provide water to a casino on tribal land. In approving the agreement, the irrigation district determined that the agreement was not subject to certa...
The Ninth Circuit affirmed a lower court decision denying an environmental group attorney fees after it successfully challenged BLM's post-fire grazing decisions and authorizations in the Jarbridge Resource Area in Idaho. In 2004, an environmental group filed suit against BLM challenging its renewal...
In early September 2011, President Barack Obama rejected EPA’s draft rule to reconsider the 2008 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) based on the OIRA’s recommendation. The letter from OIRA Administrator Cass Sunstein cites regulatory uncertainty and resulting implementation costs as reasons for its rejection, despite the fact that the CAA does not permit EPA to consider implementation costs in promulgating NAAQS. Based on the Supreme Court and D.C.
In March 2012, Iowa and Utah passed “Ag-Gag” laws in response to a series of high-profile undercover investigations of farms by animal activists. The laws were framed as generally applicable fraud prohibitions. But their aim was clear: to stop animal activists exposing the treatment of animals on industrial-scale farms. A constitutional challenge to the laws now seems likely. A court hearing such a challenge should subject the Ag-Gag laws to heightened First Amendment scrutiny under the news gathering framework of Cohen v. Cowles Media Co. The laws cannot survive such scrutiny.
The Article III standing doctrine is hindering judicial resolution of climate change harms. Imposing Article III standing requirements onto movants seeking to intervene in ongoing cases further narrows an increasingly narrow field of options for litigants to engage federal courts in implementing climate change solutions. A flexible application of intervention rules, which would not require all prospective intervenors to demonstrate their own Article III standing, could support efforts to systematically address the large-scale problem of climate change.
In March 2010, I proposed to the Director of Legal Research and Writing and the Associate Dean for Academics that I offer a section of Research and Writing II, with a slight twist: I would cover the same writing and oral advocacy skills as other sections, but with an environmental law focus.
The long legal fight over wolf reintroduction in the Northern Rocky Mountains came to a close in 2011, when Congress intervened in the ongoing court case by delisting the wolves through an appropriations bill rider. Though removal of Endangered Species Act protections by this method has exposed the Northern Rocky Mountain wolves to hunting, a deeper problem has been exposed in the doctrine of separation of powers between the legislative and judicial branches. The current approach essentially removes any barrier for Congress to meddle in ongoing court cases.