Florida appellate court to hold oral argument in PLF case this week

On Tuesday, Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal will hold oral arguments in a number of cases, including in Pacific Legal Foundation‘s P.I.E., LLC v. DeSoto County. Christina Martin and … ›

Weekly litigation update — October 14, 2017

Oral argument held in WOTUS case The Supreme Court held oral argument this last Wednesday in  National Manufacturers Association v. U.S., a case that our Washington Cattlemen’s Association case had been … ›

Weekly litigation update — October 7, 2017

New lawsuit challenging ESA overreach WOTUS at SCOTUS on Wednesday An end to mobilehome park fight in Palo Alto Opposing another legislative tax-limitation end-run, this time in Arizona Motion for … ›

A just end to property rights battle in Palo Alto

Today PLF dismissed its appeal of a case involving the Jisser family, owners of a small mobile home park in Palo Alto, Calif., who were being forced to pay millions … ›

A new excuse to punish small property owners: “affordable housing”

Can the government force a property owner to pay tens of thousands of dollars in “affordable housing” fees as a condition of granting a permit to divide a single residential … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 30, 2017

Government workers have another chance to declare independence! Supreme Court asked to restore Utah prairie dog conservation program—and constitutional limits on federal power Neither legislative bodies nor government bureaucrats can … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 23, 2017

Ninth Circuit sides with PLF in compelled speech case On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit issued a favorable opinion in American Beverage Association v. City and County of San Francisco, an … ›

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.

Designating non-habitat as "critical habitat?" Where does it stop?

In 2014, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the Gunnison sage-grouse as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act and designated over 1.4 million acres as “critical habitat” in Colorado … ›

Brand Logo for the blog page

Florida appellate court to hold oral argument in PLF case this week

On Tuesday, Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal will hold oral arguments in a number of cases, including in Pacific Legal Foundation‘s P.I.E., LLC v. DeSoto County. Christina Martin and … ›

Weekly litigation update — October 14, 2017

Oral argument held in WOTUS case The Supreme Court held oral argument this last Wednesday in  National Manufacturers Association v. U.S., a case that our Washington Cattlemen’s Association case had been … ›

Weekly litigation update — October 7, 2017

New lawsuit challenging ESA overreach WOTUS at SCOTUS on Wednesday An end to mobilehome park fight in Palo Alto Opposing another legislative tax-limitation end-run, this time in Arizona Motion for … ›

A just end to property rights battle in Palo Alto

Today PLF dismissed its appeal of a case involving the Jisser family, owners of a small mobile home park in Palo Alto, Calif., who were being forced to pay millions … ›

A new excuse to punish small property owners: “affordable housing”

Can the government force a property owner to pay tens of thousands of dollars in “affordable housing” fees as a condition of granting a permit to divide a single residential … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 30, 2017

Government workers have another chance to declare independence! Supreme Court asked to restore Utah prairie dog conservation program—and constitutional limits on federal power Neither legislative bodies nor government bureaucrats can … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 23, 2017

Ninth Circuit sides with PLF in compelled speech case On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit issued a favorable opinion in American Beverage Association v. City and County of San Francisco, an … ›

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.

Designating non-habitat as "critical habitat?" Where does it stop?

In 2014, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the Gunnison sage-grouse as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act and designated over 1.4 million acres as “critical habitat” in Colorado … ›

The Morning Docket

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

Florida appellate court to hold oral argument in PLF case this week

On Tuesday, Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal will hold oral arguments in a number of cases, including in Pacific Legal Foundation‘s P.I.E., LLC v. DeSoto County. Christina Martin and … ›

Weekly litigation update — October 14, 2017

Oral argument held in WOTUS case The Supreme Court held oral argument this last Wednesday in  National Manufacturers Association v. U.S., a case that our Washington Cattlemen’s Association case had been … ›

Weekly litigation update — October 7, 2017

New lawsuit challenging ESA overreach WOTUS at SCOTUS on Wednesday An end to mobilehome park fight in Palo Alto Opposing another legislative tax-limitation end-run, this time in Arizona Motion for … ›

A just end to property rights battle in Palo Alto

Today PLF dismissed its appeal of a case involving the Jisser family, owners of a small mobile home park in Palo Alto, Calif., who were being forced to pay millions … ›

A new excuse to punish small property owners: “affordable housing”

Can the government force a property owner to pay tens of thousands of dollars in “affordable housing” fees as a condition of granting a permit to divide a single residential … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 30, 2017

Government workers have another chance to declare independence! Supreme Court asked to restore Utah prairie dog conservation program—and constitutional limits on federal power Neither legislative bodies nor government bureaucrats can … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 23, 2017

Ninth Circuit sides with PLF in compelled speech case On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit issued a favorable opinion in American Beverage Association v. City and County of San Francisco, an … ›

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.

Designating non-habitat as "critical habitat?" Where does it stop?

In 2014, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the Gunnison sage-grouse as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act and designated over 1.4 million acres as “critical habitat” in Colorado … ›

Florida appellate court to hold oral argument in PLF case this week

On Tuesday, Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal will hold oral arguments in a number of cases, including in Pacific Legal Foundation‘s P.I.E., LLC v. DeSoto County. Christina Martin and … ›

Weekly litigation update — October 14, 2017

Oral argument held in WOTUS case The Supreme Court held oral argument this last Wednesday in  National Manufacturers Association v. U.S., a case that our Washington Cattlemen’s Association case had been … ›

Weekly litigation update — October 7, 2017

New lawsuit challenging ESA overreach WOTUS at SCOTUS on Wednesday An end to mobilehome park fight in Palo Alto Opposing another legislative tax-limitation end-run, this time in Arizona Motion for … ›

A just end to property rights battle in Palo Alto

Today PLF dismissed its appeal of a case involving the Jisser family, owners of a small mobile home park in Palo Alto, Calif., who were being forced to pay millions … ›

A new excuse to punish small property owners: “affordable housing”

Can the government force a property owner to pay tens of thousands of dollars in “affordable housing” fees as a condition of granting a permit to divide a single residential … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 30, 2017

Government workers have another chance to declare independence! Supreme Court asked to restore Utah prairie dog conservation program—and constitutional limits on federal power Neither legislative bodies nor government bureaucrats can … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 23, 2017

Ninth Circuit sides with PLF in compelled speech case On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit issued a favorable opinion in American Beverage Association v. City and County of San Francisco, an … ›

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.

Designating non-habitat as "critical habitat?" Where does it stop?

In 2014, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the Gunnison sage-grouse as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act and designated over 1.4 million acres as “critical habitat” in Colorado … ›