This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In Japan, climate litigation ( / Kiko soshou ) has been used to challenge the legality of the construction and operation of the coal-fired power plants and promote coal phase-out. Subsequently, two administrative cases were filed, one in Kobe in 2018 ( Citizens Committee on the Kobe Coal-Fired Power Plant v. Sendai Power Station ).
The Supreme Court of Japan may soon weigh in on a growing field of climate litigation in Japan against coal-fired power plants. On May 6, 2022, the Citizens’ Committee on the Kobe Coal-Fired Power Plant filed an appeal to Japan’s Supreme Court in Citizens’ Committee on the Kobe Coal-Fired Power Plant v. Civil law cases.
Latty Distinguished Professor of Law and Co-Director, Center for Innovation Policy at Duke Law In a flurry of recent decisions, the Supreme Court has continued its skepticism of administrative agencies. Consider first stare decisis and the Court’s overruling of Chevron deference (i.e. Guest post by Arti K.
States, however, retain primary authority over “ siting, permitting, and construction ” of most transmission lines. But a Middle District of Pennsylvania court recently established one key limit on states’ authority to block new transmission lines through the siting process. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
As we’ve reported in previous weekly updates, the FCC’s Media Bureau has issued a hearing designation order referring questions about Standard General Broadcasting’s proposed acquisition of the TEGNA broadcast stations to an AdministrativeLaw Judge (ALJ) for an evidentiary hearing.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. Cochran , the justices will decide whether federal district courts have the power to consider claims challenging the constitutionality of the commission’s administrativelaw proceedings.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. The United States is easily the most successful petitioner before the Supreme Court, winning review in over 70% of the cases in which it files a cert petition. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirmed.
The Chevron doctrine, a pillar of administrativelaw, also looms large in the case. Natural Resources Defense Council , determines when a federal court must defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statute it administers. However, if the statutory language is ambiguous, the court turns to step two. In 2020, the U.S.
See our post on the Broadcast Law Blog for more information, and read the audit letter setting out all the requirements for the audit response and the list of audited stations, here. The FCC itself will not routinely assess contract claims, leaving those determinations to state courts.
Supreme Court has now granted certiorari in two cases challenging the continued viability of its long-standing decision in Chevron v. The two cases, which will be heard sometime in January, both ask the Court to overrule or at least curtail so-called “Chevron deference.” Supreme Court’s decision in Chevron U.S.A.
At the same time, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit dismissed Standard’s direct appeal of the HDO (finding that there was not yet a final FCC action for Standard to appeal) but set for expedited briefing Standard’s request for a writ of mandamus (a Court order forcing the FCC to act on the pending application).
In the past, both the USPTO and patent attorneys have largely ignored the larger scope of administrativelaw, but in recent years USPTO operations have been under tighter control from the White House, and courts have increasingly asked whether the agency is following the rules. for Intell. Raimondo , 603 U.S. 837 (1984).
The NAB filed a petition with the US Court of Appeals for a “writ of mandamus” to force the FCC to resolve its 2018 Quadrennial Review. As we wrote on our Broadcast Law Blog , the FCC started its 2022 Quadrennial Review in December despite not having concluded its 2018 review.
From the Italian Recovery and Resilience Plan to the guidelines of the Italian Ministry of Justice, the urgency of a reform to strengthen out-of-court dispute resolution procedures clearly emerges. In this article, the author argues that these court orders are against the above-mentioned Legislative Decree.
New Patently-O Law Journal article by David Boundy , a partner at Potomac Law Group, PLLC. Mr. Boundy practices at the intersection of patent and administrativelaw, and consults with other firms on court and administrative agency proceedings, including PTAB trials and appeals. HowToUseGuidance.pdf.
The ‘ Acción de Cumplimiento ’ The ‘ Acción de Cumplimiento ’ is a unique legal mechanism enshrined in Article 87 of the Colombian Constitution and further developed by Law 393 of 1997. Anyone can file this type of lawsuit challenging both public and private parties if there is a clear obligation or duty in a law or administrative act.
The case also raises important issues associated with our ever-more-powerful administrative state. Although US courts are empowered by equity to counteract fraud on the system, administrative agencies are typically much more limited in their actions. ” On this point, the court distinguished the case of Torres v.
Share The Supreme Court on Monday morning issued orders from the justices’ private conference on Friday, Jan. One involves the power of federal district courts; the other tests the scope of the Clean Water Act. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld that decision.
Action continued this week on the FCC’s Media Bureau’s hearing designation order referring questions about Standard General Broadcasting’s proposed acquisition of the TEGNA broadcast stations to an AdministrativeLaw Judge (ALJ) for an evidentiary hearing.
Orthwein distinguished professor of law at Washington University in St. He is coauthor of a casebook on administrativelaw and has written many articles on that subject. There has never been any mystery about the jurisprudential premises of Justice Stephen Breyer’s approach to issues of public law. Similarly, in Lucia v.
The court concluded that the APA inherently includes an exception for procedural requirements and so the USPTO was not required to follow notice-and-comment rulemaking when promulgating the trademark applicant home-address rule, because the court deemed it to be a procedural rather than substantive rule exempt from those APA requirements.
Louisiana Federal Court Blocked Biden Administration “Pause” on New Oil and Gas Leases. The federal district court for the Western District of Louisiana issued a nationwide preliminary injunction barring the Biden administration from implementing a “Pause” on new oil and natural gas leases on public lands or in offshore waters.
In the year since the Supreme Court embraced the “major questions doctrine” (MQD), industry and Republican state attorneys general have argued that federal regulations ranging from stricter vehicle emissions standards to climate change disclosures must be struck down under its banner. Env’t Prot.
The Supreme Court on Thursday released the calendar for its February argument session, which begins on Feb. Innovation Law Lab , a challenge to the Trump administration’s “remain in Mexico” policy, which allows the Department of Homeland Security to return immigrants seeking asylum to Mexico while they wait for an asylum hearing in U.S.
Criminologically speaking, how does a schism exist between his 2024 supporters who believe in Trump’s persecution by the state and those who oppose the habitually corrupt former president’s third run for POTUS as Trump continues to provoke violence in violation of court orders not to?
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, to fill the vacancy left by the retirement of Justice Stephen Breyer, he will take his mission to diversify professional representation to the next level, putting a former federal public defender on the highest court in the land. Sentencing Commission. Sentencing Commission.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content