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
The recent decision by the Indian Supreme Court ( Supreme Court or Court ) in Ranjitsinh v. In effect, this protection is broader than most rights recognized by other courts, which have only gone as far as recognizing a constitutional right to a clean and healthy environment – something India did four decades ago.
Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of state laws requiring corporations operating within their borders to consent to personal jurisdiction when they register to do business in those states. According to the Court, such laws do not offend the Constitution’s Due Process Clause. Supreme Court’sDecision The Supreme Court reversed.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit handed down a decision in California Restaurant Association v. The court overturned a District Court ruling to invalidate a Berkeley, California, prohibition on natural gas infrastructure in newly-constructed buildings. O n Monday, April 17, 2023, the U.S. City of Berkeley.
Supreme Court held that the Quiet Title Act’s statute of limitations is a claim-processing rule rather than a bright-line rule that constrains a court’s jurisdiction. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote on behalf of the Court. Supreme Court’sDecision The Supreme Court reversed by a vote of 6-3.
Share A sad story involving child neglect has become the subject of a Supreme Court case — and white-hot political rhetoric — because the crime occurred on the reservation of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma and the victim (but, crucially, not the defendant) is a citizen of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians. The case, Oklahoma v.
Remien : The European Succession Regulation and the many questions of the European court practice – five years after entry into force. but especially national court practice shows many interesting cases of the necessary overall assessment. The decision also deals with questions of German procedural law. The long-awaited U.S.
Federal Court Found Flaws in New Climate Change Analysis for Wyoming Oil and Gas Leases. The federal district court for the District of Columbia ruled that the U.S. Second, the court concluded that BLM should have calculated and considered total greenhouse emissions, instead of merely relying on comparisons of yearly emission rates.
Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the U.S. 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. The court therefore found that the stay was unauthorized and vacated it. DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS. FEATURED CASE. A divided D.C.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district courtdecision that vacated the listing of the Beringia distinct population segment (DPS) of the Pacific bearded seal subspecies as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS. Climate Litigation Chart (Update #92): FEATURED CASE.
The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has relisted for its upcoming conference. The Supreme Court is making good progress in sorting through the current relists. The court is now holding a second relisted petition raising a similar issue, Elliott v. This week it disposed of four.
Share The Petitions of the Week column highlights some of the cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. This week, we highlight petitions that ask the court to consider, among other things, whether cellphones are similarly entitled to greater Fourth Amendment protection than other belongings at the U.S. In Mendez v.
In the wake of the US Supreme Courtdecision in Dobbs v. Vermont will also serve as a beacon of hope for women across the country who feared their fundamental right to abortion was lost forever due to a conservative Supreme Court. Montana residents also voted down a proposal to prohibit abortions.
Federal Court in Rhode Island Allowed Failure-to-Adapt Claims to Proceed. The federal district court for the District of Rhode Island for the most part denied a motion to dismiss a citizen suit asserting that Shell Oil Products US and other defendants (Shell) failed to prepare a terminal in Providence for the impacts of climate change.
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Wednesday in a Catholic virtual charter schools bid to become the nations first religious charter school. The states attorney general, Republican Gentner Drummond, went to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, seeking an order directing the charter school board to invalidate its contract with St.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday was divided over a Catholic virtual charter schools bid to become the countrys first religious charter school. Gentner Drummond, the states Republican attorney general, went to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, asking it to invalidate the boards contract with St. The state supreme court agreed to do so.
Circuit Court of Appeals found that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) failed to adequately analyze the climate change and environmental justice impacts of two liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals on the Brownsville Shipping Channel in Texas and two pipelines that would carry LNG to one of the terminals. 20-1045 (D.C.
Supreme Court will review a Colorado Supreme Courtdecision disqualifying Donald Trump from appearing on the state’s 2024 ballot on grounds he violated section 3 of the federal Constitution’s 14th amendment by engaging in insurrection. Combined, the seven amici have almost 100 years of state supreme court experience.
In Baltimore’s Climate Case Against Fossil Fuel Companies, Supreme Court Held that Appellate Review of Remand Order Extends to All Grounds for Removal. In a 7-1 decision, the U.S. The Court’sdecision concerned the interpretation of 28 U.S.C. In addition, the Court cited its decision in Yamaha Motor Corp.,
Federal Court Denied Oakland and San Francisco Motions to Return Climate Change Nuisance Cases to State Court; Found Federal Common Law of Nuisance Could Apply, Despite AEP v. The court dispensed with the cities’ three primary arguments for remanding the cases. HERE ARE THE ADDITIONS TO THE CLIMATE CASE CHART SINCE UPDATE # 107.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM) approval of an offshore drilling and production facility off the coast of Alaska in the Beaufort Sea, finding that BOEM failed to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS.
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.
Circuit Decision Vacating Affordable Clean Energy Rule. Supreme Court seeking review of the D.C. The states argued that the Supreme Court’s stay of the Clean Power Plan while it was under review by the D.C. DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS. FEATURED CASE. States and Coal Company Sought Review of D.C. 20-1530 (U.S. 20-1531 (U.S.
Washington Supreme Court Said Climate Activist Was Entitled to Present Necessity Defense Based on Evidence that Legal Alternatives Were Not “Truly Reasonable”. The Supreme Court reversed an intermediate appellate court’sdecision affirming a superior court determination that the defendant could not present a necessity defense.
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.
72 
Let's personalize your content