70 Cited authorities

Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc.
555 U.S. 7 (2008) Cited 16,939 times 68 Legal Analyses
Holding that a plaintiff must establish "that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm"
Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA
568 U.S. 398 (2013) Cited 3,121 times 169 Legal Analyses
Holding that respondents could not establish injury by relying on a "speculative chain of possibilities"
Los Angeles v. Lyons
461 U.S. 95 (1983) Cited 7,562 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding there is no justiciable controversy where plaintiff had once been subjected to a chokehold
Mazurek v. Armstrong
520 U.S. 968 (1997) Cited 3,385 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "a plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief has a "requirement for substantial proof is much higher" than a defendant's summary judgment motion
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Assoc. of the United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.
463 U.S. 29 (1983) Cited 6,659 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]'"
Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms
561 U.S. 139 (2010) Cited 1,159 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs, alfalfa farmers, had standing based on a causal chain, though plaintiffs did not identify particular alfalfa plants that had been, or would necessarily be, pollinated by bees who carried the genetically engineered gene at issue
Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe
401 U.S. 402 (1971) Cited 5,978 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding a decision is committed to agency discretion when there is "no law to apply"
Califano v. Sanders
430 U.S. 99 (1977) Cited 4,294 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the APA is not to be interpreted as an implied grant of subject-matter jurisdiction to review agency actions"
Amoco Production Co. v. Gambell
480 U.S. 531 (1987) Cited 2,092 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a District Court did not err in declining to issue an injunction to bar exploratory drilling on Alaskan public lands, because the district court's decision "did not undermine" the policy of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. § 3120, and because the Secretary of the Interior had other means of meaningfully complying with the statute
Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council
490 U.S. 332 (1989) Cited 1,392 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding NEPA does not require a "worst case analysis"
Rule 65 - Injunctions and Restraining Orders
Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 Cited 22,610 times 88 Legal Analyses
Recognizing court's ability to enter emergency order with less than full adversary hearing and even, in appropriate circumstances, without notice
Section 706 - Scope of review
5 U.S.C. § 706 Cited 20,534 times 185 Legal Analyses
Granting courts jurisdiction to "compel agency action unlawfully held or unreasonably delayed"
Section 701 - Application; definitions
5 U.S.C. § 701 Cited 9,412 times 37 Legal Analyses
Adopting the definition given in Section 551
Section 4332 - Cooperation of agencies; reports; availability of information; recommendations; international and national coordination of efforts
42 U.S.C. § 4332 Cited 3,624 times 28 Legal Analyses
Requiring that agencies prepare environmental impact statements where major agency action would significantly affect the environment
Section 11101 - Common carrier transportation, service, and rates
49 U.S.C. § 11101 Cited 128 times
Requiring that common carriers provide their rates upon request
Section 1502.2 - [Effective until 7/1/2024] Implementation
40 C.F.R. § 1502.2 Cited 106 times 2 Legal Analyses
Stating that, "[a]s in a finding of no significant impact," in an EIS' treatment of "other than significant issues ... there should be only enough discussion to show why more study is not warranted"
Section 1506.1 - [Effective until 7/1/2024] Limitations on actions during NEPA process
40 C.F.R. § 1506.1 Cited 88 times 2 Legal Analyses
Requiring suspension of agency action if “the action is not covered by an existing program statement”
Section 771.111 - Early coordination, public involvement, and project development
23 C.F.R. § 771.111 Cited 76 times 1 Legal Analyses
Setting forth guidelines for preparation of environmental document in conjunction with major federal projects
Section 46.420 - Terms used in an environmental impact statement
43 C.F.R. § 46.420 Cited 21 times
Defining the "preferred alternative" as the alternative that the agency "believes would best accomplish the purpose and need of the proposed action while fulfilling its statutory mission and responsibilities, giving consideration to economic, environmental, technical, and other factors"

COMMITTEE OF 100 ON THE FEDERAL CITY v. FOXX et al

70 Cited authorities

Holding that a plaintiff must establish "that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm"

Holding that respondents could not establish injury by relying on a "speculative chain of possibilities"

Holding there is no justiciable controversy where plaintiff had once been subjected to a chokehold

Holding that "a plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief has a "requirement for substantial proof is much higher" than a defendant's summary judgment motion

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]'"

Holding that plaintiffs, alfalfa farmers, had standing based on a causal chain, though plaintiffs did not identify particular alfalfa plants that had been, or would necessarily be, pollinated by bees who carried the genetically engineered gene at issue

Holding a decision is committed to agency discretion when there is "no law to apply"

Holding that "the APA is not to be interpreted as an implied grant of subject-matter jurisdiction to review agency actions"

Holding NEPA does not require a "worst case analysis"

Recognizing court's ability to enter emergency order with less than full adversary hearing and even, in appropriate circumstances, without notice

Granting courts jurisdiction to "compel agency action unlawfully held or unreasonably delayed"

Adopting the definition given in Section 551

Requiring that agencies prepare environmental impact statements where major agency action would significantly affect the environment

Requiring that common carriers provide their rates upon request

Stating that, "[a]s in a finding of no significant impact," in an EIS' treatment of "other than significant issues ... there should be only enough discussion to show why more study is not warranted"

Requiring suspension of agency action if “the action is not covered by an existing program statement”

Setting forth guidelines for preparation of environmental document in conjunction with major federal projects

Defining the "preferred alternative" as the alternative that the agency "believes would best accomplish the purpose and need of the proposed action while fulfilling its statutory mission and responsibilities, giving consideration to economic, environmental, technical, and other factors"