Reaction to proposed ESA rule changes
This brief editorial from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer is representative of the reception that the Service's proposed rule changes have encountered. Basically, the Post-Intelligencer criticizes the Service's view that greenhouse gas emissions from any given project are not regulable as "takes" under the ESA because the causal connection between the emissions and any discrete harm to species is wholly speculative. That seems to be an eminently reasonable proposition. The Post-Intelligencer's criticism of that analysis belies not so much superior scientific acumen as it does a rather blunt attempt to achieve certain policy ends through any means necessary. But the wiser and more prudent course is as the Service has done: to decline to use the ESA as an ill-fitted tool for addressing climate change problems.
What to read next
Our friends at Institute for Justice have convinced the Supreme Court to soon decide in the case Timbs v. Indiana whether the Constitution restrains states (and not just the federal government) from … ›
This morning the Ninth Circuit released this opinion in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Becerra, a case about whether California can demand confidential donor forms from nonprofit organizations operating within … ›