§Why CasetextPricing

National Mining Association v. Jackson et al

Memorandum in opposition to re MOTION for Preliminary Injunction

48 Cited authorities

  1. Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc.

    555 U.S. 7 (2008)   Cited 16,934 times   68 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff must establish "that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm"

  2. Steel Co. v. Citizens for Better Env't

    523 U.S. 83 (1998)   Cited 10,834 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court "act ultra vires" when it assumes "hypothetical jurisdiction" in order to rule on the merits

  3. 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

  4. Hunt v. Washington Apple Advertising Comm'n

    432 U.S. 333 (1977)   Cited 4,458 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that North Carolina's statute banning state grading of apples was discriminatory even though six other states also had no state grading

  5. University of Texas v. Camenisch

    451 U.S. 390 (1981)   Cited 3,106 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the question whether a preliminary injunction should have been issued . . . is moot . . . [where] the terms of the injunction . . . have been fully and irrevocably carried out."

  6. Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council

    490 U.S. 360 (1989)   Cited 2,004 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) )

  7. Nat'l Assoc. Home v. Defenders of Wildlife

    551 U.S. 644 (2007)   Cited 874 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a stray erroneous statement in the Federal Register "which could have had no effect on the underlying agency action being challenged" is not "the type of error that requires a remand"

  8. 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"

  9. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

    435 U.S. 519 (1978)   Cited 1,760 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where rulemaking fulfills basic APA standards for notice and procedure, a court will not impose additional process

  10. Doran v. Salem Inn, Inc.

    422 U.S. 922 (1975)   Cited 1,037 times
    Holding Younger applicable when "federal litigation was in an embryonic stage and no contested matter had been decided" at the time state criminal summons was issued

  11. Section 1251 - Congressional declaration of goals and policy

    33 U.S.C. § 1251   Cited 3,554 times   62 Legal Analyses
    Designating the Administrator of the EPA to "administer this chapter"

  12. Section 4321 - Congressional declaration of purpose

    42 U.S.C. § 4321   Cited 3,504 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Describing the purposes of NEPA as including "encourag[ing] productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment"

  13. Section 1311 - Effluent limitations

    33 U.S.C. § 1311   Cited 1,978 times   48 Legal Analyses
    Imposing general prohibition on "the discharge of any pollutant by any person"

  14. Section 1342 - National pollutant discharge elimination system

    33 U.S.C. § 1342   Cited 1,484 times   43 Legal Analyses
    Granting EPA the authority to require a permit for such discharges

  15. Section 1344 - Permits for dredged or fill material

    33 U.S.C. § 1344   Cited 1,152 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Providing that federal agencies issue permits for navigable waters—defined as those waters used or susceptible to use in interstate commerce

  16. Section 1313 - Water quality standards and implementation plans

    33 U.S.C. § 1313   Cited 550 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a State to submit new or revised water regulations for EPA's review

  17. Section 1341 - Certification

    33 U.S.C. § 1341   Cited 394 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Providing that each state "shall establish procedures for public notice in the case of all applications for certification by it and, to the extent it deems appropriate, procedures for public hearings in connection with specific applications."

  18. Section 1314 - Information and guidelines

    33 U.S.C. § 1314   Cited 242 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Requiring EPA to publish information regarding “conventional pollutants,” including “suspended solids”

  19. Section 13 - Same; demand on district judge for certificate

    3 U.S.C. § 13

    When, after the meeting of the electors shall have been held, no certificates of votes from any State shall have been received at the seat of government on the fourth Wednesday in December, the President of the Senate or, if the President of the Senate be absent from the seat of government, the Archivist of the United States shall send a special messenger to the district judge in whose custody one certificate of votes from that State has been lodged, and such judge shall forthwith transmit that certificate

  20. Section 320.4 - General policies for evaluating permit applications

    33 C.F.R. § 320.4   Cited 269 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Guiding the Corps’ "decision whether to issue a permit"

  21. Section 230.10 - Restrictions on discharge

    40 C.F.R. § 230.10   Cited 232 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Setting out the LEDPA requirement

  22. Section 123.25 - Requirements for permitting

    40 C.F.R. § 123.25   Cited 70 times
    Imposing various procedural requirements on state-run permit programs

  23. Section 325.3 - Public notice

    33 C.F.R. § 325.3   Cited 43 times
    Specifying the public notice procedures

  24. Section 123.44 - EPA review of and objections to State permits

    40 C.F.R. § 123.44   Cited 33 times

    (a) (1) The Memorandum of Agreement shall provide a period of time (up to 90 days from receipt of proposed permits) to which the Regional Administrator may make general comments upon, objections to, or recommendations with respect to proposed permits. EPA reserves the right to take 90 days to supply specific grounds for objection, notwithstanding any shorter period specified in the Memorandum of Agreement, when a general objection is filed within the review period specified in the Memorandum of Agreement

  25. Section 131.5 - EPA authority

    40 C.F.R. § 131.5   Cited 29 times

    (a) Under section 303(c) of the Act, EPA is to review and to approve or disapprove State-adopted water quality standards. The review involves a determination of: (1) Whether the State has adopted designated water uses that are consistent with the requirements of the Clean Water Act; (2) Whether the State has adopted criteria that protect the designated water uses based on sound scientific rationale consistent with § 131.11 ; (3) Whether the State has adopted an antidegradation policy that is consistent