The Seventh Circuit reversed a district court's preliminary injunction prohibiting approval of a proposed land exchange in Wisconsin for construction of a high-voltage electric transmission line that would run through the Upper Mississippi River National Wildlife and Fish Refuge. The appellate court...
The D.C. Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the Army Corps of Engineers and NMFS in a challenge to approval of a dredging project in Puerto Rico's San Juan Bay. Environmental groups argued the agencies failed to take the necessary "hard look" at the project's environmental effect. The district co...
The First Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and NMFS in a challenge to BOEM's approval for construction of a wind power project off the coast of Massachusetts. A group of Nantucket residents argued NMFS violated the ESA by issuing a deficient biologic...
The First Circuit affirmed summary judgment for NMFS in a challenge to the Service's issuance of an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) for construction of a wind power project off the coast of Massachusetts. A part-time Martha's Vineyard resident argued NMFS' determination that the IHA, which...
The D.C. Circuit denied environmental groups' petition to review FERC's certification of an interstate natural gas pipeline expansion project. The groups argued FERC violated NEPA by failing to consider the full scope of the project's environmental effects because the EIS did not include four other ...
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) enforcement program has long been the backbone of environmental enforcement in the United States. That program may now be bound for dramatic change. This Article analyzes the threats posed to the Agency’s program by the U.S. Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, in which three constitutional questions presented cut to the core of administrative enforcement.
Supplemental environmental projects (SEPs) have received a growing amount of attention in recent years, from the Donald Trump Administration banning their use in settlements, to regulation and guidance from the Joseph Biden Administration reversing the ban, to legislative proposals prohibiting them altogether. This Article examines SEPs’ legality under existing law, focusing on claims that they violate the Miscellaneous Receipts Act and the Antideficiency Act. It begins with a brief history of SEPs’ policy evolution and the limitations on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s and U.S.
A district court denied tribes' and conservation groups' request to preliminarily enjoin construction of a transmission line through the San Pedro Valley in Arizona. The plaintiffs argued BLM violated the National Historic Preservation Act when it authorized construction to begin without assessing t...
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that the Takings Clause does not distinguish between legislative and administrative land use permit conditions, in a lawsuit concerning a traffic impact fee as a condition of building a prefabricated home on a parcel of land. The landowner challenged the fee a...
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that Texas property owners should be permitted to pursue claims under the Takings Clause through an inverse-condemnation cause of action available under Texas law. Over 120 property owners argued that a Texas highway elevation and expansion project, which buil...