Monday morning notes
Welcome back and Happy New Year. Here are a few quick ESA-related items of note:
The Baltimore Sun previews the Obama's administration response to recent Bush administration regulations.
The Winston-Salem Journal previews incoming Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.
At the PropertyProf Blog, Professor Barros notes the posting of an article by University of Houston law professor Marcilynn A. Burke. Professor Burke's paper is entitled Green Peace? Protecting Our National Treasures While Providing for Our National Security and contends in part that "[a]pplication of the precautionary principle exhorts that decisionmakers should protect these resources even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established. Abandoning protection of the country's natural resources, treasures that make this country worth defending, in the name of national security deserves greater thought and study, particularly given the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the Navy sonar case and the Marine Corps' request to expand its bombing and training range in the Mojave Desert."
In response to our criticism last month of his Godfather-ESA post, NRDC's Josh Mogerman argues that we are "completely humorless" and that we should "get a grip." Injecting humor into public interest litigation, or any litigation for that matter, isn't the easiest thing to do, but we'll give it a try in 2009. The irony here is that Mogerman seems to be upset over the mere fact that we disagreed with his earlier hyperbole-filled entry — but isn't that what blogs are for? (Thanks to Mogerman, however, for the shout-out on the Fredo line).
Also, while we currently do not accept comments, readers can always email us at plfonesa AT pacificlegal.org.
What to read next
PLF asks the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that there is no “legislative exception” to the unconstitutional conditions doctrine
It seems that some governments and courts prefer to treat Supreme Court precedent as an option, rather than a requirement. The Supreme Court has ruled—twice—that it’s unconstitutional for government to … ›