89 Cited authorities

  1. Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Res. Def. Council

    467 U.S. 837 (1984)   Cited 16,028 times   504 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts "must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress"
  2. Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation

    497 U.S. 871 (1990)   Cited 9,549 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to admit affidavits in support of standing when filed after summary judgment briefing and hearing were complete
  3. Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Assoc. of the United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.

    463 U.S. 29 (1983)   Cited 6,639 times   50 Legal Analyses
    Holding that " `settled course of behavior embodies the agency's informed judgment that, by pursuing that course, it will carry out the policies [of applicable statutes or regulations]'"
  4. Auer v. Robbins

    519 U.S. 452 (1997)   Cited 2,338 times   89 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a federal agency's interpretation of a regulation is controlling where it is not "plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation"
  5. Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance

    542 U.S. 55 (2004)   Cited 1,469 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that agency can be compelled to act if time period is specified by law
  6. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe

    401 U.S. 402 (1971)   Cited 5,971 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding a decision is committed to agency discretion when there is "no law to apply"
  7. Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council

    490 U.S. 360 (1989)   Cited 2,003 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts must defer to the "informed discretion" of federal agencies where the agencies’ decisions require "a high level of technical expertise" (quoting Kleppe v. Sierra Club , 427 U.S. 390, 412, 96 S.Ct. 2718, 49 L.Ed.2d 576 (1976) )
  8. Thomas Jefferson Univ. v. Shalala

    512 U.S. 504 (1994)   Cited 1,276 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the agency’s interpretation must be given controlling weight unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation"
  9. Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council

    490 U.S. 332 (1989)   Cited 1,391 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding NEPA does not require a "worst case analysis"
  10. Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo

    456 U.S. 305 (1982)   Cited 1,769 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Federal Water Pollution Control Act did not mandate injunctions against its violation
  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 329,129 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
  12. Section 706 - Scope of review

    5 U.S.C. § 706   Cited 20,463 times   184 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts jurisdiction to "compel agency action unlawfully held or unreasonably delayed"
  13. Section 701 - Application; definitions

    5 U.S.C. § 701   Cited 9,377 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the definition given in Section 551
  14. Section 4332 - Cooperation of agencies; reports; availability of information; recommendations; international and national coordination of efforts

    42 U.S.C. § 4332   Cited 3,617 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that agencies prepare environmental impact statements where major agency action would significantly affect the environment
  15. Section 4321 - Congressional declaration of purpose

    42 U.S.C. § 4321   Cited 3,500 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Describing the purposes of NEPA as including "encourag[ing] productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment"
  16. Section 1531 - Congressional findings and declaration of purposes and policy

    16 U.S.C. § 1531   Cited 1,672 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Finding and declaring that "various species of fish, wildlife, and plants in the United States have been rendered extinct" while "other species ... have been so depleted in numbers that they are in danger of or threatened with extinction ...."
  17. Section 1536 - Interagency cooperation

    16 U.S.C. § 1536   Cited 1,320 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that every federal agency "insure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by such agency . . . is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species"
  18. Section 1532 - Definitions

    16 U.S.C. § 1532   Cited 868 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Defining "conservation" as "the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this chapter are no longer necessary"
  19. Section 1533 - Determination of endangered species and threatened species

    16 U.S.C. § 1533   Cited 817 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Requiring periodic review of listed species
  20. Section 1701 - Congressional declaration of policy

    43 U.S.C. § 1701   Cited 546 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded prudential standing as to the FLPMA due only to their "aesthetic and "recreational interest" in land
  21. Section 402.14 - Formal consultation

    50 C.F.R. § 402.14   Cited 706 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Requiring disclosure of Draft Biological Opinions to private applicants if requested
  22. Section 402.02 - Definitions

    50 C.F.R. § 402.02   Cited 489 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Defining "action" as "all activities or programs of any kind authorized, funded, or carried out, in whole or in part, by Federal agencies in the United States or upon the high seas. Examples include, but are not limited to . . . actions directly or indirectly causing modifications to the land, water, or air"
  23. Section 17.3 - [Effective 5/13/2024] Definitions

    50 C.F.R. § 17.3   Cited 275 times   11 Legal Analyses
    In 50 C.F.R. § 17.3, petitioner Secretary of the Interior further defines "harm" to include "significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife."
  24. Section 402.16 - Reinitiation of consultation

    50 C.F.R. § 402.16   Cited 202 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Requiring the Services to reinitiate consultation in specified circumstances, including when "new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously considered"
  25. Section 1502.16 - Environmental consequences

    40 C.F.R. § 1502.16   Cited 172 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the detailed statement should include: "environmental impacts of the alternatives . . ., any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented, the relationship between short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and any irreversible or irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposal"
  26. Section 8342.1 - Designation criteria

    43 C.F.R. § 8342.1   Cited 26 times

    The authorized officer shall designate all public lands as either open, limited, or closed to off-road vehicles. All designations shall be based on the protection of the resources of the public lands, the promotion of the safety of all the users of the public lands, and the minimization of conflicts among various uses of the public lands; and in accordance with the following criteria: (a) Areas and trails shall be located to minimize damage to soil, watershed, vegetation, air, or other resources

  27. Section 424.02 - Definitions

    50 C.F.R. § 424.02   Cited 15 times   4 Legal Analyses

    The definitions contained in the Act and parts 17, 222, and 402 of this title apply to this part, unless specifically modified by one of the following definitions. Definitions contained in part 17 of this title apply only to species under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Definitions contained in part 222 of this title apply only to species under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service. Candidate. Any species being considered by the Secretary for listing as