71 Cited authorities

Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc.
555 U.S. 7 (2008) Cited 16,853 times 56 Legal Analyses
Holding that a plaintiff must establish "that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm"
Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife
504 U.S. 555 (1992) Cited 27,945 times 138 Legal Analyses
Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"
Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc.
528 U.S. 167 (2000) Cited 7,178 times 25 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs who curtailed their recreational activities on a river due to reasonable concerns about the effect of pollutant discharges into that river had standing
Summers v. Earth Island Inst.
555 U.S. 488 (2009) Cited 3,008 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that supplementation of the district court record to receive affidavits from the organization's members was not permitted "in the circumstances here: after the trial is over, judgment has been entered, and a notice of appeal has been filed"
Bennett v. Spear
520 U.S. 154 (1997) Cited 3,692 times 35 Legal Analyses
Holding that a Final Biological Opinion has "legal consequences," even though the action agency is not legally obligated to accept the opinion's recommendations or conclusions, because the opinion "alter the legal regime to which the action agency is subject"
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Assoc. of the United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.
463 U.S. 29 (1983) Cited 6,641 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 1,148 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
Amoco Production Co. v. Gambell
480 U.S. 531 (1987) Cited 2,090 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
Sierra Club v. Morton
405 U.S. 727 (1972) Cited 2,786 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiff-organization did not establish Article III standing for injunctive relief where the organization failed to show that its members would be affected by the actions it sought to enjoin
Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill
437 U.S. 153 (1978) Cited 1,511 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that budget appropriations cannot alter meaning of statute
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 329,337 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 706 - Scope of review
5 U.S.C. § 706 Cited 20,472 times 185 Legal Analyses
Granting courts jurisdiction to "compel agency action unlawfully held or unreasonably delayed"
Section 4332 - Cooperation of agencies; reports; availability of information; recommendations; international and national coordination of efforts
42 U.S.C. § 4332 Cited 3,618 times 28 Legal Analyses
Requiring that agencies prepare environmental impact statements where major agency action would significantly affect the environment
Section 1531 - Congressional findings and declaration of purposes and policy
16 U.S.C. § 1531 Cited 1,674 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 ...."
Section 1536 - Interagency cooperation
16 U.S.C. § 1536 Cited 1,321 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"
Section 1540 - Penalties and enforcement
16 U.S.C. § 1540 Cited 993 times 12 Legal Analyses
Requiring such notice
Section 1604 - National Forest System land and resource management plans
16 U.S.C. § 1604 Cited 613 times 2 Legal Analyses
Granting the Secretary rulemaking authority over LRMP development and revision procedures
Section 1600 - Congressional findings
16 U.S.C. § 1600 Cited 469 times 1 Legal Analyses
Directing agency to specify guidelines for land management plans
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
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"
Section 1500.1 - Purpose and policy
40 C.F.R. § 1500.1 Cited 461 times 2 Legal Analyses
Explaining that the purpose of NEPA's procedures is to make information available before decisions are made
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"
Section 402.13 - Informal consultation
50 C.F.R. § 402.13 Cited 181 times 3 Legal Analyses
Explaining that the consultation requirement is satisfied if during the informal consultation the Service concurs in writing that the action "is not likely to adversely affect" a listed species
Section 402.12 - Biological assessments
50 C.F.R. § 402.12 Cited 169 times 1 Legal Analyses
Requiring the action agency to solicit “a list of any listed or proposed species or designated or proposed critical habitat that may be present in the action area” or to provide such a list of species or habitat to the Service for inclusion in the BA

Conservation Congress et al v. Finley et al

71 Cited authorities

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

Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

Holding that plaintiffs who curtailed their recreational activities on a river due to reasonable concerns about the effect of pollutant discharges into that river had standing

Holding that supplementation of the district court record to receive affidavits from the organization's members was not permitted "in the circumstances here: after the trial is over, judgment has been entered, and a notice of appeal has been filed"

Holding that a Final Biological Opinion has "legal consequences," even though the action agency is not legally obligated to accept the opinion's recommendations or conclusions, because the opinion "alter the legal regime to which the action agency is subject"

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 that plaintiff-organization did not establish Article III standing for injunctive relief where the organization failed to show that its members would be affected by the actions it sought to enjoin

Holding that budget appropriations cannot alter meaning of statute

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

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

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

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 ...."

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"

Requiring such notice

Granting the Secretary rulemaking authority over LRMP development and revision procedures

Directing agency to specify guidelines for land management plans

Requiring disclosure of Draft Biological Opinions to private applicants if requested

Explaining that the purpose of NEPA's procedures is to make information available before decisions are made

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"

Explaining that the consultation requirement is satisfied if during the informal consultation the Service concurs in writing that the action "is not likely to adversely affect" a listed species

Requiring the action agency to solicit “a list of any listed or proposed species or designated or proposed critical habitat that may be present in the action area” or to provide such a list of species or habitat to the Service for inclusion in the BA