Columbia Climate Law
SEPTEMBER 19, 2018
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and NOAA Marine Fisheries (NMFS) issued a sweeping proposal to amend key provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), including provisions pertaining to listing decisions, critical habitat designations, and interagency consultations. By Jessica Wentz. In July, the U.S.
Legal Planet
AUGUST 26, 2021
This was a case under the Endangered Species Act. The Supreme Court interpreted the statute to place an absolute priority on preserving endangered species, regardless of the impact on the economy or other government goals. This decision made the Endangered Species Act the strongest of the environmental statutes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Law Columbia
OCTOBER 8, 2021
These phenomena are driving changes in species distribution, phenology, and population dynamics, as well as changes in the structure and function of ecosystems and the timing of ecological processes.
Law Columbia
JULY 6, 2017
The court agreed with the magistrate’s conclusion that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim for violation of a nondiscretionary duty under the Endangered Species Act and that the court therefore lacked jurisdiction. The government also asserted that the MBTA and Eagle Act claims were barred by controlling precedent.
Environmental Science
SEPTEMBER 7, 2018
Any upset to this balance such as a resource depletion or removal, the introduction of an invasive species , damaging tree cover and uncontrolled emissions can cause long-term and wide-scale problems for an environment. We are already seeing the depletion of the ice caps and rising sea levels.
Law Columbia
OCTOBER 7, 2019
Circuit Ruled that EPA Must Consider Endangered Species in Setting Renewable Fuel Standards. Circuit Court of Appeals sent the 2018 Renewable Fuel Standards rule back to EPA after finding that EPA failed to comply with requirements of the Endangered Species Act. California v. Bernhardt , No. 3:19-cv-06013 (N.D.
Law Columbia
MARCH 6, 2018
The court stated that the issue arose “because a necessary and critical element of the hydrological damage caused by defendants’ alleged conduct is the rising sea level along the Pacific coast and in the San Francisco Bay, both of which are navigable waters of the United States.” AquAlliance v. Bureau of Reclamation , No. BP p.l.c. ,
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
52 
Let's personalize your content