Weekly litigation report — November 4, 2017

PLF asks the Supreme Court to bury Williamson County, Seattle attempts to force unionization on Uber/Lyft Drivers, and PLF files a complaint to require the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to define “subspecies”.

Weekly litigation report — October 28, 2017

City sells townhouse, demolishes it, and then sends new owner bill for the demolition Representing David and Lourdes Garrett, PLF filed  this opening brief in the Fifth Circuit Court of … ›

New lawsuit challenging Endangered Species Act overreach

This morning, we filed a complaint in federal district court in D.C. challenging the National Marine Fisheries Service’s 2016 “biological opinion” governing FEMA’s implementation of the national flood insurance program … ›

Who knew that permafrost was “navigable water”?

Yesterday, we received an adverse decision in Tin Cup LLC v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In this case, we represent a small, family-run Alaska pipe and steel fabrication firm … ›

Kill regulations to save the sage grouse

The greater sage grouse is a chicken-sized bird that’s found on 172 million acres of western lands. The grouse population of nearly 500,000 birds in 11 states was managed effectively, … ›

Hearing: Oversight of Agency Compliance with the Congressional Review Act

Next week, the House Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust law will hold a hearing entitled “Rulemakers Must Follow the Rules, Too: Oversight of Agency Compliance with the Congressional Review Act.” PLF’s Todd Gaziano has been invited to testify at the hearing.

Why Fish and Wildlife is wrong on critical habitat

Recently, the Sacramento Bee ran an op-ed entitled “Why Fish and Wildlife is right on endangered frogs” that criticized a lawsuit filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of California farmers and ranchers. The op-ed misrepresents the lawsuit and perpetuates a misconception about the Endangered Species Act.

PLF’s lawsuit does not question whether the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was right to list three California amphibians as protected species under the ESA. Nor does it question whether the Service was right to designate critical habitat to conserve the species. Under the law, the Service is required to make these determinations.

Weekly litigation report — September 2, 2017

This week’s topics: Can the executive branch be the judicial branch? When is “just compensation” unjust? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?

Does President Trump know that his Administration is blocking an important Michigan road project?

On behalf of its client the Marquette County Road Commission, PLF filed its Reply Brief in Marquette County Road Commission v. EPA.

Brand Logo for the blog page

Weekly litigation report — November 4, 2017

PLF asks the Supreme Court to bury Williamson County, Seattle attempts to force unionization on Uber/Lyft Drivers, and PLF files a complaint to require the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to define “subspecies”.

Weekly litigation report — October 28, 2017

City sells townhouse, demolishes it, and then sends new owner bill for the demolition Representing David and Lourdes Garrett, PLF filed  this opening brief in the Fifth Circuit Court of … ›

New lawsuit challenging Endangered Species Act overreach

This morning, we filed a complaint in federal district court in D.C. challenging the National Marine Fisheries Service’s 2016 “biological opinion” governing FEMA’s implementation of the national flood insurance program … ›

Who knew that permafrost was “navigable water”?

Yesterday, we received an adverse decision in Tin Cup LLC v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In this case, we represent a small, family-run Alaska pipe and steel fabrication firm … ›

Kill regulations to save the sage grouse

The greater sage grouse is a chicken-sized bird that’s found on 172 million acres of western lands. The grouse population of nearly 500,000 birds in 11 states was managed effectively, … ›

Hearing: Oversight of Agency Compliance with the Congressional Review Act

Next week, the House Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust law will hold a hearing entitled “Rulemakers Must Follow the Rules, Too: Oversight of Agency Compliance with the Congressional Review Act.” PLF’s Todd Gaziano has been invited to testify at the hearing.

Why Fish and Wildlife is wrong on critical habitat

Recently, the Sacramento Bee ran an op-ed entitled “Why Fish and Wildlife is right on endangered frogs” that criticized a lawsuit filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of California farmers and ranchers. The op-ed misrepresents the lawsuit and perpetuates a misconception about the Endangered Species Act.

PLF’s lawsuit does not question whether the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was right to list three California amphibians as protected species under the ESA. Nor does it question whether the Service was right to designate critical habitat to conserve the species. Under the law, the Service is required to make these determinations.

Weekly litigation report — September 2, 2017

This week’s topics: Can the executive branch be the judicial branch? When is “just compensation” unjust? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?

Does President Trump know that his Administration is blocking an important Michigan road project?

On behalf of its client the Marquette County Road Commission, PLF filed its Reply Brief in Marquette County Road Commission v. EPA.

The Morning Docket

Stay up to date with the Morning Docket, a weekly highlight of PLF's best articles, videos, and podcasts.

Weekly litigation report — November 4, 2017

PLF asks the Supreme Court to bury Williamson County, Seattle attempts to force unionization on Uber/Lyft Drivers, and PLF files a complaint to require the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to define “subspecies”.

Weekly litigation report — October 28, 2017

City sells townhouse, demolishes it, and then sends new owner bill for the demolition Representing David and Lourdes Garrett, PLF filed  this opening brief in the Fifth Circuit Court of … ›

New lawsuit challenging Endangered Species Act overreach

This morning, we filed a complaint in federal district court in D.C. challenging the National Marine Fisheries Service’s 2016 “biological opinion” governing FEMA’s implementation of the national flood insurance program … ›

Who knew that permafrost was “navigable water”?

Yesterday, we received an adverse decision in Tin Cup LLC v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In this case, we represent a small, family-run Alaska pipe and steel fabrication firm … ›

Kill regulations to save the sage grouse

The greater sage grouse is a chicken-sized bird that’s found on 172 million acres of western lands. The grouse population of nearly 500,000 birds in 11 states was managed effectively, … ›

Hearing: Oversight of Agency Compliance with the Congressional Review Act

Next week, the House Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust law will hold a hearing entitled “Rulemakers Must Follow the Rules, Too: Oversight of Agency Compliance with the Congressional Review Act.” PLF’s Todd Gaziano has been invited to testify at the hearing.

Why Fish and Wildlife is wrong on critical habitat

Recently, the Sacramento Bee ran an op-ed entitled “Why Fish and Wildlife is right on endangered frogs” that criticized a lawsuit filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of California farmers and ranchers. The op-ed misrepresents the lawsuit and perpetuates a misconception about the Endangered Species Act.

PLF’s lawsuit does not question whether the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was right to list three California amphibians as protected species under the ESA. Nor does it question whether the Service was right to designate critical habitat to conserve the species. Under the law, the Service is required to make these determinations.

Weekly litigation report — September 2, 2017

This week’s topics: Can the executive branch be the judicial branch? When is “just compensation” unjust? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?

Does President Trump know that his Administration is blocking an important Michigan road project?

On behalf of its client the Marquette County Road Commission, PLF filed its Reply Brief in Marquette County Road Commission v. EPA.

Weekly litigation report — November 4, 2017

PLF asks the Supreme Court to bury Williamson County, Seattle attempts to force unionization on Uber/Lyft Drivers, and PLF files a complaint to require the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to define “subspecies”.

Weekly litigation report — October 28, 2017

City sells townhouse, demolishes it, and then sends new owner bill for the demolition Representing David and Lourdes Garrett, PLF filed  this opening brief in the Fifth Circuit Court of … ›

New lawsuit challenging Endangered Species Act overreach

This morning, we filed a complaint in federal district court in D.C. challenging the National Marine Fisheries Service’s 2016 “biological opinion” governing FEMA’s implementation of the national flood insurance program … ›

Who knew that permafrost was “navigable water”?

Yesterday, we received an adverse decision in Tin Cup LLC v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In this case, we represent a small, family-run Alaska pipe and steel fabrication firm … ›

Kill regulations to save the sage grouse

The greater sage grouse is a chicken-sized bird that’s found on 172 million acres of western lands. The grouse population of nearly 500,000 birds in 11 states was managed effectively, … ›

Hearing: Oversight of Agency Compliance with the Congressional Review Act

Next week, the House Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust law will hold a hearing entitled “Rulemakers Must Follow the Rules, Too: Oversight of Agency Compliance with the Congressional Review Act.” PLF’s Todd Gaziano has been invited to testify at the hearing.

Why Fish and Wildlife is wrong on critical habitat

Recently, the Sacramento Bee ran an op-ed entitled “Why Fish and Wildlife is right on endangered frogs” that criticized a lawsuit filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of California farmers and ranchers. The op-ed misrepresents the lawsuit and perpetuates a misconception about the Endangered Species Act.

PLF’s lawsuit does not question whether the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was right to list three California amphibians as protected species under the ESA. Nor does it question whether the Service was right to designate critical habitat to conserve the species. Under the law, the Service is required to make these determinations.

Weekly litigation report — September 2, 2017

This week’s topics: Can the executive branch be the judicial branch? When is “just compensation” unjust? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?

Does President Trump know that his Administration is blocking an important Michigan road project?

On behalf of its client the Marquette County Road Commission, PLF filed its Reply Brief in Marquette County Road Commission v. EPA.