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 Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has relisted for its upcoming conference. The Supreme Court continues its recent streak of promoting relists to granted cases, as the court granted review in The Hain Celestial Group, Inc. A short explanation of relists is available here.
The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has relisted for its upcoming conference. The Supreme Court made short work of two of last weeks first-time relists. The court granted review in United States Postal Service v. The district court agreed and dismissed Whole Foods with prejudice.
The district court in Oregon in 2016 seemed to favor such a right, but a divided Ninth Circuit concluded in 2020 that the plaintiffs lacked standing. The plaintiffs are now back in the district court seeking much more modest relief.). Photo by Mark Koch on Unsplash. Now we have an important new decision from Montana.
The US Supreme Court Monday declined to hear five appeals from fossil fuel companies requesting to have their cases moved from state to federal courts. All five petitions concern whether federal common law, which is law developed over time by courts, or state law applies to lawsuits over greenhouse-gas emissions that cross state lines.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has relisted for its upcoming conference. First, as I pledged in my last post , I am only too happy to eat crow after predicting that the court would not take one-time relist Villarreal v. A short explanation of relists is available here. But the U.S.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has relisted for its upcoming conference. Once again this week, the Supreme Court has been busy sifting through the relists. And the court denied review of a petition raising a First Amendment challenge to university bias-response teams.
Over the past few years, opponents of offshore wind energy have filed at least 15 lawsuits against 5 projects in federal court. One tactic that plaintiffs in these lawsuits sometimes use is to move for a preliminary injunction to halt construction until the court reaches a final decision on the merits.
Below is my column in the Wall Street Journal on the ongoing opioid litigation and an important ruling out of the Oklahoma Supreme Court. ” The Oklahoma Supreme Court last week struck down a $465 million opioid award against Johnson & Johnson based on a legal theory that has previously been tried and failed against guns.
Federal Court in RhodeIsland Allowed Failure-to-Adapt Claims to Proceed. The court further found that CLF’s members’ alleged injuries to their use and enjoyment of waters and roads in the terminal’s vicinity flowed from the alleged failure to prepare the terminal for the impacts of climate change. FEATURED CASE.
The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Trump administration to weigh in on a dispute between Exxon Mobil and three Cuban-owned companies stemming from the Cuban governments seizure of property more than a half-century ago. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which by a vote of 2-1 upheld the district courts decision.
To end any confusion created by the court's injunction. The court can think of few things more disingenuous. The rescission, if it can be called that, appears to be nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to prevent this court from granting relief. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo.
As the repercussions of the leaked draft of the Supreme Court’s preliminary ruling on Roe v. In 2019, Illinois and New York enacted provisions excluding a pregnant person from fetal homicide laws, and RhodeIsland repealed its fetal homicide law. . Supreme Court, reports Bloomberg News. Wade continue to shake U.S.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has relisted for its upcoming conference. So at the last conference, the Supreme Court acted on a ton of relists. White , the court summarily vacated a decision by the U.S. A short explanation of relists is available here. California.
A federal court in RhodeIsland Tuesday issued a preliminary injunction against a presidential executive order issued in March that cuts funding for several federal agencies, including the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). This comes in response to an injunction filed by 21 state attorneys general last month.
The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has relisted for its upcoming conference. There are 102 petitions and applications on the Supreme Courts docket for this weeks conference. That said, lower courts have had trouble determining what Ross s governing rule is under Marks v.
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.
Fourth Circuit Declined to Stay Remand Order in Baltimore’s Climate Case Against Fossil Fuel Companies; Companies Sought Stay from Supreme Court. Supreme Court. On October 2, the district court granted the companies’ motion to temporarily extend its stay of the remand order until the Supreme Court resolves the application.
The Trump administration had a bad night in Boston followed by a lousy morning in Providence, as two courts gave major side eye to the DOJ’s latest legal stylings. Judge McConnell pointedly noted that parties who defy a court order are risking criminal contempt, even if the order is later reversed.
A Supreme Court decision Thursday upending a century-old New York State gun licensing restriction has been called a major blow to state gun control interventions across the country. The Court released its opinion in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. It’s reprehensible.
In a split decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that young people and other plaintiffs asserting a claim against the federal government for infringement of a Fifth Amendment due process right to a “ climate system capable of sustaining human life” did not have Article III standing. One reason the petitioners asked the D.C.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has handed down a significant ruling on the exception to the First Amendment for criminal threats. The court reversed the decision of District Court Judge Charles Breyer, who rejected the charges against Howard Weiss who threatened Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.
Oregon Supreme Court Said Public Trust Doctrine Did Not Impose Obligation to Protect Resources from Climate Change. With respect to the scope of the doctrine, the Supreme Court said the public trust doctrine extends both to the State navigable waters and to the State’s submerged and submersible lands. (A FEATURED CASE. Chernaik v.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has relisted for its upcoming conference. The Supreme Courts upcoming conference the second January conference — is ordinarily the justices last opportunity to add new cases to the docket in time for them to review and decide the disputes by the summer recess.
Today’s hiding comes courtesy of Judge John McConnell in RhodeIsland, who is not impressed with the government’s claim to have violated his prior TRO by accident. Office of Management and Budget [Docket via Court Listener] Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she produces the Law and Chaos substack and podcast.
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.
In Baltimore’s Climate Case Against Fossil Fuel Companies, Supreme Court Held that Appellate Review of Remand Order Extends to All Grounds for Removal. The Court declined to review the companies’ other grounds for removal, finding that the “wiser course” was to allow the Fourth Circuit to address them in the first instance.
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). FEATURED CASE. 20-472 (U.S.
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.
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’s decision affirming a superior court determination that the defendant could not present a necessity defense.
The Attorney Generals (AGs) for Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, RhodeIsland, Vermont, Washington, Washington DC and Wisconsin filed the complaint in a Massachusetts District Court.
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