Winter V Natural Resources Defense Council Case Brief

Vnatu ral resources defense council inc et al.

Winter v natural resources defense council case brief. In balancing military preparedness against environmental concerns the majority came down solidly on the side of national security. Court of appeals for the ninth circuit. Natural resources defense council inc et al. A preliminary injunction was granted by a federal district court against the navy d and this was upheld by the us.

Vermont yankee nuclear power corp. V natural resources defense council inc et al. Certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. Winter secretary of the navy et al.

Argued october 8 2008decided november 12 2008. On writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit. Garre acting solicitor general counsel of record ronald j. Whether courts below properly enjoined the navys use of sonar during certain training exercises for failure to conduct an environmental impact statement over a finding of emergency circumstances by the council on environmental quality.

Navy the navy defendant alleging that the navys use of mid frequency active mfa sonar during its training programs harmed marine life off the coast of southern california in violation of several federal laws. Argued october 8 2008decided november 12 2008 antisubmarine warfare is one of the navys highest priorities. Brief for the petitioners. The natural resources defense council p filed a case against the us.

Natural resources defense council inc. 7 2008 brief fact summary. 365 2009 was whether the navys decision to conduct 14 training exercises off the coast of southern california complied with several environmental laws including the national environmental policy act of 1969 nepa the coastal zone management act of 1972 czma and the. To discover such submarines a navy vessel emits a loud noise underwater and listens for it to echo back indicating that the sound may have ricocheted off the side of another vessel.

Nrdc jean michael cousteau an environmentalist and filmmaker and several other environmental groups collectively plaintiffs filed suit in federal district court against donald winter secretary of the us. Tenpas assistant attorney general edwin s. 7 was a decision by the united states supreme court concerning whether federal law restricted the united states navys ability to use sonar during drills given the possibility of a harmful effect on marine mammals such as whales. Supreme court of the united states.

Natural resources defense council 555 us. Winter secretary of the navy et al petitioners. Natural resources defense council inc. Natural resources defensecouncil inc.

2d 460 11 erc 1439 1978 scope of review of agency action constitutional constraints on agency procedure. Natural resources defense council inc435 us. Natural resources defense council 129 sct. Chief justice roberts wrote in his opinion the most serious possible injury.

The issue in winter v. Navy the navy d to stop the use of naval sonar in its training programs because the sonar might adversely affect marine mammals. Certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit.