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 their house in Playa Del Rey, Los Angeles. Even though the Greenes’ plans were consistent with local and state laws, the Commission told them that they had to scrap their plans and build a smaller house. The Greenes sued the Commission, arguing that all of the Commission’s stated reasons for imposing the smaller house requirement were unreasonable and not supported by evidence. Unfortunately, last month a Los Angeles Superior Court judge found that while some of the stated reasons could not support the Commission’s decisions, other stated reasons could support the decision. In the latest brief, we argue that this ambiguity requires the judge to send the case back to the Commission, so that it can decide whether it still wishes to impose the restrictions in light of the judge’s decision.
Victory in American Federation of Aviculture v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Thanks to a lawsuit filed by PLF, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service yesterday issued a proposed rule to remove outdated and counterproductive regulations that hurt golden parakeet conservation efforts. According to experts, breeders are helping conservation efforts by depressing incentives for smugglers to take golden parakeets from the wild. But current regulations make it difficult for breeders to trade captive golden parakeets, which in turn makes it difficult for them to maintain healthy flocks. Last year we sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Department of the Interior on behalf of the American Federation of Aviculture to push the government to follow the requirements of the Endangered Species Act and conduct a legally required review of the species We believed the review would result in a better outcome for the bird and for breeders. The federal government settled the lawsuit and agreed to complete the 12-month review by September of this year. Yesterday, the government delivered on its promise and proposed to recognize the golden parakeet’s improved status and to remove the counterproductive permit requirements. Read more on our blog.
learn more about
American Federation of Aviculture v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Thanks to the efforts of private breeders, the golden parakeet is no longer threatened with extinction. Although the federal government acknowledges the bird’s tenfold increase in numbers, it has refused to comply with a law that requires it to make a final decision to delist or downlist the parakeet within 12 months of that finding. On behalf of a coalition of breeders and bird owners, the American Federation of Aviculture, PLF is suing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to force it to comply with the law, reclassify the golden parakeet, and lift onerous restrictions that prevent breeders from selling to all other breeders.Read more
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 … ›