| Publisher: U of Montana
| ||||||
Similar Journals
|
Public Land and Resources Law Review
Number of Followers: 0  Open Access journalISSN (Print) 0148-6489 - ISSN (Online) 1093-6858 Published by U of Montana  [2 journals]
|
- W. Org. Res. Councils, et al. v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt.
Authors: Sawyer J. Connelly et al.
Abstract: The United States District Court for the District of Montana granted Plaintiffs summary judgment against BLM and the State of Wyoming. The court ruled that BLM violated NEPA and the APA because it failed to consider alternative leasing programs and the broad downstream impacts of coal, oil, and gas leasing in two Powder River Basin resource management plans. This decision followed WORC I & II, in which the court remanded the same plans to BLM to correct deficiencies. Following BLM’s revisions, Plaintiffs again sued in this case, arguing the revisions were still deficient under NEPA.
PubDate: Sat, 11 Feb 2023 16:13:13 PST
- West Virginia v. EPA
Authors: Amanda Spear et al.
Abstract: The EPA created the Clean Power Plan in an effort to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions generated by coal-fired power plants. The EPA determined that the Best System of Emission Reduction for existing coal-fired power plants included generation shifting methods, meaning a shift from coal to cleaner sources. The Supreme Court held, under the major questions doctrine, that Congress had not intended for the EPA to use generation shifting methods for the Best System of Emission Reduction and that the EPA had exceeded its authority in doing so. This note will explore how the decision may impact administrative law with the official introduction of the major questions doctrine, as well as the potential environmental impacts.
PubDate: Sat, 11 Feb 2023 16:12:59 PST
- Solenex, LLC v. Haaland
Authors: Jennifer Kieffer Jensen
Abstract: In 1982, BLM issued an oil and gas lease in the Badger-Two Medicine to Solenex’s predecessor. The Badger-Two Medicine, located in the Lewis and Clark National Forest, is an area of cultural and spiritual importance to the Blackfeet Tribe. After four decades of disagreement as to whether the lease was validly issued, the Secretary of the Interior found that the lease violated the National Historic Preservation Act. Accordingly, she canceled Solenex’s lease and revoked Solenex’s Application for Permit to Drill. The District Court for the District of Columbia held the Secretary did not possess the authority to cancel Solenex’s lease. The court also held that the Secretary’s revocation of Solenex’s Application for Permit to Drill was arbitrary and capricious. This case note will discuss why the court’s holdings are most likely flawed, as well as discuss ways in which the NHPA’s ability to protect culturally significant tribal land might be improved.
PubDate: Sat, 11 Feb 2023 16:12:49 PST
- Treaty-based Climate Change Claims: Litigation Pathways in the Face of
Cultural Devastation
Authors: Kirsten D. Gerbatsch
PubDate: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 08:05:01 PDT
- Do it for the Kids: Protecting Future Generations from Climate Change
Impacts and Future Pandemics in Maryland Using an Environmental Rights
Amendment
Authors: Johanna Adashek
PubDate: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 08:04:51 PDT
- Youth and Indigenous Voices in Climate Justice: Leveraging Best Practices
from U.S. and Canadian Litigation
Authors: Randall S. Abate
PubDate: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 08:04:40 PDT
- Water Justice Under the Big Sky: Locating a Human Right to Water in
Montana Law
Authors: Abigail R. Brown
PubDate: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 08:04:29 PDT
- A Judicial Duty: Interpreting and Enforcing Montanan's Inalienable
Right to a Clean and Healthful Environment
Authors: Nate Bellinger et al.
PubDate: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 08:04:17 PDT
- Letter to the Reader
PubDate: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 08:04:07 PDT
- Editors and Staff Members
PubDate: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 08:03:45 PDT
- Friends of the Earth v. Haaland Case Summary
Authors: Valan Anthos
Abstract: A federal district court vacated the U.S.’s largest offshore oil and gas lease sale ever because of an inadequate NEPA analysis. The court found that the BOEM’s decision to exclude estimations of reductions in foreign oil consumption if no lease took place was arbitrary and capricious.
PubDate: Thu, 05 May 2022 10:41:39 PDT
- PREVIEW—Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta: A Test of State and Tribal
Sovereignty
Authors: Genevieve Antonioli Schmit
Abstract: Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta challenges the reach of the United States Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in McGirt v. Oklahoma and tests the settled criminal jurisdiction scheme within Indian Country. On April 27, 2022, beginning at 10:00 a.m. EST., the U.S. Supreme Court will hear argument on the sole question of whether a state court has concurrent jurisdiction with a federal court to prosecute non-Indians who commit crimes against Indians in Indian country. The State of Oklahoma (“Petitioner”) argues that it has concurrent jurisdiction to prosecute such crimes. Castro-Huerta (“Respondent”) argues that the Court should adopt the current understanding that the federal government has exclusive authority to prosecute here.
PubDate: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 05:58:06 PDT
- Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. EPA: Cost Consideration in State Water
Quality Variances
Authors: Clare Ols
Abstract: State water quality standards developed under the Clean Water Act play a key role in curtailing the negative environmental, economic, and human health impacts of water pollution. Under the state water quality regulatory framework, EPA may grant variances to state standards should the state demonstrate the compliance with its standards is infeasible for a certain pollutant discharger or waterbody. Montana DEQ developed a variance for nutrients based on evidence that compliance with those standards would cause economic harm. EPA approved Montana's nutrient pollutant variance, and Upper Missouri Waterkeeper challenged EPA's approval on the grounds that the variance violates the Clean Water Act. The Ninth Circuit held that (1) EPA may consider the cost of implementing pollution control technology to attain compliance with state standards when approving variance requests, and (2) EPA properly interpreted its regulations as requiring compliance with the variance standard only at the end of the variance term. This note will explore how the decision may incentivize states to engage in a water quality race-to-the-bottom; sacrificing improvements in the name of cost, failing to protect the health of our nation's waters, and further exposing low-income communities to degraded resources.
PubDate: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 15:33:02 PDT
- PREVIEW — Denezpi v. United States (2022). Double Jeopardy in Indian
Country
Authors: Paul A. Hutton III
Abstract: On February 22, the Supreme Court of the United States will decide the single issue of whether a Court of Indian Offenses constitutes a federal entity and, therefore, separate prosecutions in federal district court and a Court of Indian Offenses for the same act violates the Double Jeopardy Clause as prosecutions for the same offense.
PubDate: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 23:22:15 PST
- Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & Ouray Reservation v. U.S. Dep't
of Interior
Authors: Valan Anthos
Abstract: The Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & Ouray Reservation brought 16 claims against federal agencies and the State of Utah for alleged mismanagement of water resources held in trust and for alleged discrimination in water allocation. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed several of the claims as time-barred and others as lacking a proper statutory basis to create an enforceable trust duty. The remaining claims were transferred to the United States District Court of the District of Utah because the events occurred in Utah and most of the parties reside there.
PubDate: Fri, 03 Dec 2021 16:22:27 PST
- Bahr v. Regan
Authors: Aspen B. Ward
Abstract: In June 2015, the Lake Fire burned through California’s San Bernardino National Forest. Three hundred miles east of the fire, six air quality monitors exceeded NAAQS in Phoenix, Arizona. Arizona’s Department of Environmental Quality petitioned the EPA to exclude those exceedances to avoid stricter regulatory burdens and the need for contingency measures. Applying the Exceptional Events Rule, the EPA permitted the petition to exclude the data therefore allowing Phoenix to successfully demonstrate attainment of the ozone NAAQS by the July 2018 deadline. Petitioner’s sought review of the EPA’s final decision and were denied their petition for review by the Ninth Circuit. Bahr illustrates how regulations dealing with wildfire smoke emissions are misaligned the intent of the Clean Air Act. Though the Ninth Circuit decision properly uses the legal framework, the framework itself neglects current wildfire regimes and mechanisms to mitigate air quality concerns.
PubDate: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 11:52:58 PST
- Vecinos para el Bienestar de la Comunidad Costera v. FERC
Authors: Malcolm M. Gilbert
Abstract: The D.C. Circuit Court remanded three Brownsville, TX LNG approval orders to FERC for failing to adequately explain conclusions around environmental justice and climate concerns. The Court ordered FERC to reevaluate whether the projects are in the public interest. The LNG terminals and pipeline will disproportionately impact low-income, minority communities, and substantial greenhouse gas emissions from production and export will contribute to anthropogenic climate change. This case note explores the role that environmental justice and climate change play in federal agency decision-making processes, analyzes the legal framework for the Court's decision, and discusses how the outcome of this litigation could affect similar project proposals in future FERC decisions. “
PubDate: Wed, 03 Nov 2021 07:37:40 PDT
- PREVIEW—Lac Courte Orielles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa v. Evers:
Just How Special Is Indian Law'
Authors: Zachary M. Krumm
Abstract: The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments on Monday, November 8, 2021, at 9:30 a.m. at Everett McKinley Dirksen Courthouse in Chicago, Illinois. This case asks whether states may assess property taxes on Indian-owned reservation fee lands that were allotted under treaty, not the General Allotment Act. The lower court held that reservation allotments which had at any time been owned by non-tribal-members could be subject to state property tax. Allotments always held by members remained exempt. While this issue is somewhat narrow, it raises broad questions about applying the well-established Indian canons of construction.
PubDate: Tue, 02 Nov 2021 15:02:24 PDT
- Held v. State
Authors: Alec D. Skuntz
Abstract: On March 13, 2020, a group of 16 Montana children and teenagers filed a complaint in the First Judicial District, Lewis and Clark County against the State of Montana and several state agencies. These young Plaintiffs sought injunctive and declaratory relief against Defendants for their complicity in continuing to extract and release harmful amounts of greenhouse gases which contribute to climate change. Plaintiffs premised their argument on the Montana Constitution’s robust environmental rights and protections. The Defendants filed a motion to dismiss which the District Court granted in-part and denied in-part. Held provides a roadmap for future litigation by elucidating Montana’s jurisprudential approach to a constitutional challenge about climate change. This strategy allowed Plaintiffs to streamline judicial review which is important because climate change is not an impending threat but an active one. The young Plaintiffs sought expansive remedies and the Court will now only hear the ones considered judicially reasonable. Held highlights issues of intergenerational equity and the abdication of government from recognizing that present and future citizens have a right to enjoy land, air, and water held in public trust.
PubDate: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 18:57:27 PDT
