A whale of a win
Today, the National Marine Fisheries Service announced that it is beginning a one-year review to determine whether to delist the Southern Resident population of killer whale from the Endangered Species Act. The agency’s decision is in direct response to a delisting petition submitted by Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of the Center for Environmental Science, Accuracy, and Reliability, as well as two Central Valley farmers whose water supply is threatened by the orca’s ESA listing.
NMFS has determined that PLF’s delisting petition contains “substantial information” supporting a delisting. Therefore, the ESA requires that the agency conduct a further one-year review to determine whether delisting should in fact occur. NMFS made its determination based on PLF’s argument that new genetic information indicates that the Southern Resident killer whales are not genetically distinct, in a meaningful way, from killer whales throughout the world.
NMFS’s decision in favor of sound science is particularly gratifying to PLF and its clients in light of the strident, and frankly unfair and misdirected, criticisms hurled at PLF’s petition when filed back in August. We now anxiously await the agency’s final decision on the delisting petition, which we expect in August, 2013.
What to read next
Shed a (crocodile) tear for Luke Skywalker today, as Mark Hamill’s much ballyhooed Autograph Law is set to be undone and reformed by the same California officials who made the mistake to pass it in the first place. AB 228 has arrived at the Governor’s desk, and in all likelihood will be signed into law any day.
Our new flagship publication, Sword&Scales, offers 16 pages of news and information to bring you up close to the vital work of our legal team. Our ardent defense of the right to own and use private property takes center stage in the inaugural issue. It’s at the core of our mission in the nation’s courts.
On Thursday, in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, PLF filed this reply brief in support of its cert petition to the Supreme Court of the United States. In this case, we’re representing Minnesota voters in a First Amendment challenge to a ban on political apparel at polling places.
The Daily Journal published my column on California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, recently decided by the California Supreme Court. As the op-ed points out, the ruling undermines Proposition 218’s requirements that all new taxes at the local level need voter approval.