Weekly litigation update — October 27, 2018

This road to the Supreme Court takes PLF through the U-P This week Pacific Legal Foundation filed its latest Petition for Writ of Certiorari at the Supreme Court of the … ›

Victory: Activists’ effort to worsen overcriminalization ends with a whimper

In 2013, several environmental activist groups launched a lawsuit to expand the criminal reach of the Endangered Species Act. They challenged the United States’ longstanding interpretation of the statutes, which … ›

Is It a “Species” or a “Subspecies”? We Need Consistency.

Late last year, PLF submitted a petition for rule-making to the Interior and Commerce Departments (and their delegate agencies the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries … ›

Weekly litigation update — October 6, 2018

A shy frog becomes the center of attention at the Supreme Court This week the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral argument in our Endangered Species Act case … ›

Weekly litigation update — September 29, 2018

PLF attorney gives congressional testimony on ESA reform This week, PLF attorney Jonathan Wood testified before the House Natural Resource Committee, urging Congress to improve the Endangered Species Act to … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 8, 2018

 Agencies must explain their decisions Thursday, we filed the latest brief in Mark and Bella Greene v. California Coastal Commission. The Greenes are a retired couple who wish to remodel … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 1, 2018

It’s time to finally settle the legislative exactions question Earlier this week, PLF attorneys filed this reply brief in support of the U.S. Supreme Court petition in Dabbs v. Anne … ›

Briefing nearing completion in gnatcatcher challenge

This week we filed our final trial court brief in our challenge to the Endangered Species Act listing of the coastal California gnatcatcher. We argue that the gnatcatcher should not … ›

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Should Follow the Law

The Service claims it is exempt from Regulatory Flexibility Act requirements because critical habitat designations impact only other federal agencies. But this claim is in error. While critical habitat designations do require federal agencies to manage critical habitat, the restrictions of the designations also directly affect small businesses, making designations subject to RFA requirements.

Brand Logo for the blog page

Weekly litigation update — October 27, 2018

This road to the Supreme Court takes PLF through the U-P This week Pacific Legal Foundation filed its latest Petition for Writ of Certiorari at the Supreme Court of the … ›

Victory: Activists’ effort to worsen overcriminalization ends with a whimper

In 2013, several environmental activist groups launched a lawsuit to expand the criminal reach of the Endangered Species Act. They challenged the United States’ longstanding interpretation of the statutes, which … ›

Is It a “Species” or a “Subspecies”? We Need Consistency.

Late last year, PLF submitted a petition for rule-making to the Interior and Commerce Departments (and their delegate agencies the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries … ›

Weekly litigation update — October 6, 2018

A shy frog becomes the center of attention at the Supreme Court This week the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral argument in our Endangered Species Act case … ›

Weekly litigation update — September 29, 2018

PLF attorney gives congressional testimony on ESA reform This week, PLF attorney Jonathan Wood testified before the House Natural Resource Committee, urging Congress to improve the Endangered Species Act to … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 8, 2018

 Agencies must explain their decisions Thursday, we filed the latest brief in Mark and Bella Greene v. California Coastal Commission. The Greenes are a retired couple who wish to remodel … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 1, 2018

It’s time to finally settle the legislative exactions question Earlier this week, PLF attorneys filed this reply brief in support of the U.S. Supreme Court petition in Dabbs v. Anne … ›

Briefing nearing completion in gnatcatcher challenge

This week we filed our final trial court brief in our challenge to the Endangered Species Act listing of the coastal California gnatcatcher. We argue that the gnatcatcher should not … ›

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Should Follow the Law

The Service claims it is exempt from Regulatory Flexibility Act requirements because critical habitat designations impact only other federal agencies. But this claim is in error. While critical habitat designations do require federal agencies to manage critical habitat, the restrictions of the designations also directly affect small businesses, making designations subject to RFA requirements.

The Morning Docket

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

Weekly litigation update — October 27, 2018

This road to the Supreme Court takes PLF through the U-P This week Pacific Legal Foundation filed its latest Petition for Writ of Certiorari at the Supreme Court of the … ›

Victory: Activists’ effort to worsen overcriminalization ends with a whimper

In 2013, several environmental activist groups launched a lawsuit to expand the criminal reach of the Endangered Species Act. They challenged the United States’ longstanding interpretation of the statutes, which … ›

Is It a “Species” or a “Subspecies”? We Need Consistency.

Late last year, PLF submitted a petition for rule-making to the Interior and Commerce Departments (and their delegate agencies the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries … ›

Weekly litigation update — October 6, 2018

A shy frog becomes the center of attention at the Supreme Court This week the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral argument in our Endangered Species Act case … ›

Weekly litigation update — September 29, 2018

PLF attorney gives congressional testimony on ESA reform This week, PLF attorney Jonathan Wood testified before the House Natural Resource Committee, urging Congress to improve the Endangered Species Act to … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 8, 2018

 Agencies must explain their decisions Thursday, we filed the latest brief in Mark and Bella Greene v. California Coastal Commission. The Greenes are a retired couple who wish to remodel … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 1, 2018

It’s time to finally settle the legislative exactions question Earlier this week, PLF attorneys filed this reply brief in support of the U.S. Supreme Court petition in Dabbs v. Anne … ›

Briefing nearing completion in gnatcatcher challenge

This week we filed our final trial court brief in our challenge to the Endangered Species Act listing of the coastal California gnatcatcher. We argue that the gnatcatcher should not … ›

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Should Follow the Law

The Service claims it is exempt from Regulatory Flexibility Act requirements because critical habitat designations impact only other federal agencies. But this claim is in error. While critical habitat designations do require federal agencies to manage critical habitat, the restrictions of the designations also directly affect small businesses, making designations subject to RFA requirements.

Weekly litigation update — October 27, 2018

This road to the Supreme Court takes PLF through the U-P This week Pacific Legal Foundation filed its latest Petition for Writ of Certiorari at the Supreme Court of the … ›

Victory: Activists’ effort to worsen overcriminalization ends with a whimper

In 2013, several environmental activist groups launched a lawsuit to expand the criminal reach of the Endangered Species Act. They challenged the United States’ longstanding interpretation of the statutes, which … ›

Is It a “Species” or a “Subspecies”? We Need Consistency.

Late last year, PLF submitted a petition for rule-making to the Interior and Commerce Departments (and their delegate agencies the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries … ›

Weekly litigation update — October 6, 2018

A shy frog becomes the center of attention at the Supreme Court This week the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral argument in our Endangered Species Act case … ›

Weekly litigation update — September 29, 2018

PLF attorney gives congressional testimony on ESA reform This week, PLF attorney Jonathan Wood testified before the House Natural Resource Committee, urging Congress to improve the Endangered Species Act to … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 8, 2018

 Agencies must explain their decisions Thursday, we filed the latest brief in Mark and Bella Greene v. California Coastal Commission. The Greenes are a retired couple who wish to remodel … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 1, 2018

It’s time to finally settle the legislative exactions question Earlier this week, PLF attorneys filed this reply brief in support of the U.S. Supreme Court petition in Dabbs v. Anne … ›

Briefing nearing completion in gnatcatcher challenge

This week we filed our final trial court brief in our challenge to the Endangered Species Act listing of the coastal California gnatcatcher. We argue that the gnatcatcher should not … ›

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Should Follow the Law

The Service claims it is exempt from Regulatory Flexibility Act requirements because critical habitat designations impact only other federal agencies. But this claim is in error. While critical habitat designations do require federal agencies to manage critical habitat, the restrictions of the designations also directly affect small businesses, making designations subject to RFA requirements.