The New York Times on the Section 7 proposals
The New York Times stated yesterday that, in the Section 7 consultation proposals, Interior Secretary Kempthorne has "carved out significant exceptions to regulations requiring expert scientific review of any federal project that might harm endangered or threatened species (one consequence will be to relieve the agency of the need to assess the impact of global warming on at-risk species)."
Not surprisingly, there is little substantive analysis from the Times on the regulatory proposals. Similar to other articles on the subject, there is no mention of the ability of FWS or NMFS to require agency consultations even if the regulations go into effect, nor is there mention of the increased resource availability FWS and NMFS will have to deal with true threats to endangered species under the proposed regulations.
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 … ›