The final days of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 term saw the release of several decisions that may – or may not, depending on one’s perspective and desired strategy – hold significant implications for administrative law...more
7/5/2024
/ Administrative Procedure Act ,
Chevron Deference ,
Chevron v NRDC ,
Government Agencies ,
Judicial Authority ,
Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo ,
National Marine Fisheries Service ,
Regulatory Authority ,
Relentless Inc v US Department of Commerce ,
SCOTUS ,
Statutory Interpretation
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (together, the Agencies) issued a straight-to-final-rule revised definition of “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) on August 29, 2023. This...more
On May 25, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Sackett v. EPA, No. 21-454, holding that Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction extends to wetlands only if they have a continuous surface connection to...more
The dormant Commerce Clause is one of the oldest constitutional doctrines, dating to the early 1800s. The Commerce Clause of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to regulate interstate commerce, and the dormant...more
On January 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) granted review of Sackett v. EPA, apparently with the sole purpose of deciding once and for all “the proper test for determining whether wetlands are ‘waters of the United...more
Many companies that have submitted confidential business information to the federal government have learned the hard way that the Courts and federal agencies have not interpreted the word “confidential” under the Freedom of...more
7/3/2019
/ Appeals ,
Confidential Information ,
Congressional Intent ,
Exemptions ,
FOIA ,
Food Marketing Institute v Argus Leader Media ,
Motion to Compel ,
Private Commercial or Financial Information ,
Protected Disclosures ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
SNAP Program ,
Statutory Interpretation ,
Substantial-Competitive-Harm Test ,
Trade Secrets ,
USDA
The Supreme Court determined in Sturgeon v. Frost that the Nation River, located near Alaska’s eastern border, is not public land for purposes of regulation by the National Park Service (NPS). This case arose due to a...more
5/30/2019
/ ANILCA ,
Lack of Authority ,
National Park Service ,
Navigable Waters ,
Non-Public Land ,
Regulatory Authority ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Rivers ,
SCOTUS ,
State and Local Government ,
States Rights ,
Sturgeon v Frost ,
Vessels
In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court today held that lawsuits challenging the 2015 rule amending the definition of waters of the United States (WOTUS Rule) under the Clean Water Act (CWA) must be brought in federal...more
A few months ago, we (and most everyone else not working at the Justice Department) predicted that the Supreme Court would rule that property owners seeking to develop potential federal wetlands on their property may...more
On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court wiped away a longstanding judicial doctrine that had placed greater procedural requirements on a federal agency when it changes its prior interpretation of a federal regulation....more
The U.S. Supreme Court has put to rest a longstanding legal question affecting the deadline for plaintiffs to bring toxic tort and contamination claims stemming from certain contaminated sites. CTS Corp. v. Waldburger, No....more