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
United States , the justices will return to a familiar statute: the Armed Career Criminal Act, which imposes an enhanced sentence for unlawful possession of a firearm if the defendant has three convictions “committed on occasions different from one another.” The court designated six cases as bellwether cases. And in Erlinger v.
Circuit also rejected EPA’s argument that the court did not have authority to review stays issued under Section 307(d)(7)(D) of the Clean Air Act. Fourth Circuit Said WestVirginia District Court Lacked Jurisdiction to Consider Coal Companies’ Clean Air Act Jobs Study Lawsuit. DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS.
As the dispute came to the Supreme Court, it centered on legislation enacted earlier this year by Congress to expedite the pipeline’s completion. Joe Manchin, a WestVirginia Democrat, the act also included a provision that ordered federal agencies to issue any permits needed to complete the pipeline. As a concession to Sen.
Ergon-WestVirginia, Inc. Ninth Circuit Rejected Claim That CEQA Applied to Taxi Rules for Airport Pickups. The appellate court also found that even if the trial court erred, the error was harmless because the State proved both acts beyond a reasonable doubt. 19-2128 (4th Cir. Zepeda , No. 80593-2-I (Wash.
The US Supreme Court Thursday ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not have the authority under section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act to enforce proposed power plant emission limitations in WestVirginia v. ” In WestVirginia v. ” The final ruling was 6-3 on ideological lines.
The court also granted motions to strike the state law claims pursuant to California’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statute. The court granted the company leave to amend its complaint with 21 days. Both sets of intervenors also said the court should limit any abeyance period to 120 days.
Empire Health Foundation did not mention Chevron at all, even though Chevron loomed large in the briefing for both cases, which involved agency interpretations of complex Medicare statutes. Instead, the court simply interpreted the two statutes at issue by looking primarily at the statutes’ text and structure.
The New Jersey court also found no basis for Grable jurisdiction, rejecting the companies’ arguments that the City’s claims necessarily raised substantial and actually disputed issues of federal law such as First Amendment issues or issues addressed by federal environmental statutes. WestVirginia v.
The court dismissed the proceedings 11 days after the effective date of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule repealing the Clean Power Plan and finalizing the final Affordable Clean Energy rule in its place. WestVirginia v. The case was argued before the High Court on January 22, 2019.
The courtruled against her and found that the park’s duty was only to “make conditions as safe as they appear to be” and that Munoz “ was aware of the risk she encountered, and expected to be surprised, startled, and scared.” See Pennsylvania General Assembly Statute §7102. Trimble ␣ 315 Mo.
The federal district court for the Eastern District of California held that more analysis of the impacts climate change would have on a water transfer program for the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta was required under NEPA. WestVirginiaCourt Dismissed Defamation Suit Against John Oliver Brought by Coal Executive and His Companies.
Supreme Court held that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals erred when it concluded that its review of the remand order in Baltimore’s climate change case against fossil fuel companies was limited to determining whether the defendants properly removed the case under the federal officer removal statute.
And depending on exactly how the justices rule, their decision could limit the power of federal agencies more broadly. The dispute at the center of WestVirginia v. Two coal-mining companies and 20 Republican-led states, including WestVirginia and North Dakota, asked the Supreme Court to review the D.C.
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