1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.
-
Upload
paula-thompson -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
2
Transcript of 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.
![Page 1: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
Judicial Review Under NEPA
Bob MalmsheimerApril 1, 2006
![Page 2: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
An Overview
Introduction Prerequisites for Litigation Judicial Review Remedies Questions
![Page 3: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Introduction: The Parties
Plaintiff: The party commencing a civil lawsuit, who alleges
that she was injured by the agency’s actions. Most NEPA plaintiffs are public interest
organizations and citizen groups.
Defendant: The party against whom a legal action is brought
in civil court: always at least one federal agency. NEPA always involves civil court litigation. Generally natural resource agencies: DOA, DOI,
ACE, but also DOT. DOJ (ENR Division) defends lawsuits.
![Page 4: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Introduction: Types of NEPA Litigation
Whether an agency properly applied a categorical exclusion.
Whether an agency properly decided not to prepare an EIS (or Supplemental EIS).
Whether the EIS was adequate. Note: U.S. Supreme Court has held that NEPA
is a procedural, not a substantive, statute. Question is “Did the agency follow the proper
NEPA procedures?” NOT: “Did the agency choose an environmentally
sound alternative?”
![Page 5: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Prerequisites for Litigation:Introduction
Plaintiffs must overcome numerous requirements to win a NEPA case:
Plaintiffs must meet jurisdictional requirement before a court can review an agency’s decision.
In court, plaintiffs must prove agency action violated NEPA.
Even if plaintiffs prevail, their remedies are very limited.
![Page 6: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Prerequisites for Litigation:Cause of Action
Plaintiff must have a legal basis for their cause of action.
NEPA contains no enforcement provisions. Administrative Procedure Act
Courts use the APA as legal basis for judicial review of federal agency compliance with NEPA.
NEPA litigation usually involves “informal” agency actions. Exception: judicial review of proposed CEQ regulations.
APA Section 702: “a person suffering legal wrong because of agency action, or adversely affected by agency action within the meaning of the relevant statute” has a cause of action.
![Page 7: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Prerequisites for Litigation:Venue
The Federal Court System U.S. Supreme Court (1)
(Primarily appellate jurisdiction) U.S. Courts of Appeals (13)
(Primarily appellate jurisdiction) U.S. District Courts (94)
(Primarily original jurisdiction – trial courts) Generally NEPA litigation occurs in the U.S.
District Court where proposed action is located or in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. But some statutes specify U.S. Court of Appeals.
![Page 8: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Prerequisites for Litigation:Standing
Must be a connection between the plaintiff and the lawsuit.
Individual Plaintiffs must show: Injury-in-fact: Plaintiff must suffered an
injury-in-fact (Sierra Club v. Morton). Causation: The cause of plaintiff’s injury
must be directly related to defendant’s behavior.
![Page 9: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Prerequisites for Litigation:Standing (Con’t)
Redressibility: The injury would be remediated if the plaintiff got what she wanted (i.e., if her lawsuit prevailed).
Zone of Interest (APA §706): Plaintiff is in the zone of interest protected by the statute.
Association plaintiffs must show: One of its members would have standing to
bring the action (see above), and The lawsuit relates to the purposes of the
organization.
![Page 10: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Prerequisites for Litigation:Other Issues
Must exhaustion administrative remedies Plaintiff must go through all administrative procedures
before she can appeal to U.S. District Court.
Controversy must be ripe Courts will not interfere in NEPA process until Final EIS
(and ROD), FONSI, or “irreparable injury” will occur.
Controversy must not be moot Controversy no longer exists because action
completed.
Common Law Doctrine of Laches does not apply. Plaintiff unreasonably delays initiating lawsuit.
![Page 11: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Judicial Review:Standard of Review
Many standards of review. But most courts examine whether the
agency’s decision was: “Arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or
otherwise not in accordance with the law,” or “Without observance of procedure required by
law” (5 USC §706(2)).
Courts review the Administrative Record (ROD). Studies, data, documents used to make NEPA
decision. Courts rarely consider other evidence.
![Page 12: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Judicial Review:Deference to Agencies
U.S. Supreme Court: Courts should defer to agencies’ decisions. Progressive ideas about agencies.
Chervon v. NRDC Courts should defer to agency decisions unless:
Agency violated Congress’ clear intent, or Agency’s decision was arbitrary and capricious.
Vermont Yankee Judges should not substitute their decisions for
permissible agency decisions.
![Page 13: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Judicial Review:How Often Do Agencies Win?
The U.S. Supreme Court has supported the federal agency in EVERY NEPA case it has heard.
Agencies are more successful in U.S. Courts of Appeals and U.S. District Courts. All of the important early NEPA decisions
were in the U.S. Courts of Appeals. But note: Published cases v. unpublished
cases.
![Page 14: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Remedies:An Injunction
Courts do not award money damages in NEPA cases. But Note: Equal Access to Justice Act.
If plaintiff wins, court declares agency’s NEPA obligations. Courts instruct agencies what to do. Courts sometimes issue preliminary injunctions. Note: In 1970s, some courts awarded permanent
injunctions, but U.S. Supreme Court later declared NEPA a procedural statute.
So why would a plaintiff file a NEPA lawsuit?
![Page 15: 1 Judicial Review Under NEPA Bob Malmsheimer April 1, 2006.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc85503460f94990127/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Questions?