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 Second Circuit agreed with the district court that the plaintiff lacked standing because he failed to allege an injury in fact since he “never explained why he had any legal right to have the document distributed.” EPA’s brief is due December 15. National Environmental Development Association’s Clean Air Project v. Williams , No.
Federal Court Upheld State Department’s Invocation of FOIA Exception for Legal Memorandum Supporting Paris Agreement Request. Department of State properly withheld a legal memorandum that accompanied an “action memorandum” seeking authorization from the Secretary of State to join the Paris Agreement. 4:19-cv-00362 (E.D. filed Sept.
93A [Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act], punitivedamages. Amicus briefs have been filed by: Washington Legal Foundation Atlantic Legal Foundation Landmark Legal Foundation Montana National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. At first, a US District Court dismissed the case, which we reported here.
Montana Federal Court Allowed Some Coal Mining Activity to Take Place While Federal Agency Completed Required NEPA Review. The company said the injunction would “[i]n a matter of weeks … cause severe consequences to the mine and its employees, in an area of Montana that can ill-afford economic displacement.” CP18-5 (FERC Oct.
The Ninth Circuit was not persuaded by the plaintiff states’ argument that “precedent requires a broad, fact-intensive inquiry into whether altering an injunction is equitable, even if the legal duty underlying the injunction has disappeared.” Bernhardt , No. 4:18-cv-05712 (N.D. County of Maui v. Sunoco LP , No. 2CCV-20-0000283 (Haw.
Circuit in 2016 signaled that the legal framework for the Clean Power Plan “hinges on important issues of federal that EPA then—and the court below now—got so wrong this Court was likely to grant review.” Montana Federal Court Vacated Approvals for Mining Project. Haaland , No. 1:21-cv-00175 (D.D.C. The groups alleged that the U.S.
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