Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T11:42:14.570Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reason for Hope? The Spotted Owl Injunctions and Policy Change

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Brendon Swedlow
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Under what conditions can US courts contribute to policy change? This article shows how a case study can be used to test and develop a theory of judicial policy making answering this question. In The Hollow Hope (1991, 2008), Gerald Rosenberg theorizes that judicial policy making is constrained by the limited nature of constitutional rights, the lack of judicial independence, and the judiciary's inability to implement its rulings. Ninth Circuit injunctions protecting the Northern Spotted Owl and orders to manage ecosystems in the Pacific Northwest invalidate and help reformulate Rosenberg's theory. These rulings show how judicial interpretations of statutes, regulations, precedent, and facts allow judicial policy making if these interpretations are accepted by the legal and political culture when Congress and the presidency are too divided to override them. The owl rulings also show how statutes facilitate the implementation of judicial rulings, a point not developed by Rosenberg, while additionally providing further evidence for Rosenberg's specification of conditions allowing implementation.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 34 , Issue 4 , Fall 2009 , pp. 825 - 867
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2009 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Anleu, Sharyn Roach, and Mack, Kathy. 2007. Magistrates, Magistrate Courts, and Social Change. Law & Policy 29 (2): 183–209.Google Scholar
Barnes, Jeb. 2004. Overruled? Legislative Overrides, Pluralism, and Contemporary Court‐Congress Relations. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Barnes, Jeb, and Burke, Thomas F. 2006. The Diffusion of Rights: From Law on the Books to Organizational Rights Practices. Law & Society Review 40 (3): 493–523.Google Scholar
Baum, Lawrence, and Hausegger, Lori. 2004. The Supreme Court and Congress: Reconsidering the Relationship. In Making Policy, Making Law: An Interbranch Perspective, ed. Miller, Mark C. and Barnes, Jeb, 107–22. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, Frank R., and Jones, Bryan D. 1993. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, Frank R., and Jones, Bryan D., eds. 2002. Policy Dynamics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Blackstone, Bethany. 2008. Are “overrides” overrated? The effect of legislation passed in response to the constitutional decisions of the United States Supreme Court. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 28–31, in Boston, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Burstein, Paul, and Edwards, Mark Evan. 1994. The Impact of Employment Discrimination Litigation on Racial Disparity in Earnings. Law & Society Review 28 (1): 79–112.Google Scholar
Canon, Bradley C. 1998. The Supreme Court and Policy Reform: The Hollow Hope Revisited. In Leveraging the Law: Using the Courts to Achieve Social Change, ed. Schultz, David A., 215–49. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
Carp, Robert A., Manning, Kenneth L., and Stidham, Ronald. 2004. The Decision‐Making Behavior of George W. Bush's Judicial Appointees. Judicature 88 (1): 20–28.Google Scholar
Cashore, Benjamin, and Howlett, Michael. 2006. Behavioral Thresholds and Institutional Rigidities as Explanations of Punctuated Equilibrium Processes in Pacific Northwest Forest Policy Dynamics. In Punctuated Equilibrium and the Dynamics of US Environmental Policy, ed. Repetto, Robert, 137–61. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Cashore, Benjamin, and Howlett, Michael. 2007. Punctuating Which Equilibrium? Understanding Thermostatic Policy Dynamics in Pacific Northwest Forestry. American Journal of Political Science 51 (3): 532–51.Google Scholar
Chase, Alston. 1995. In a Dark Wood: The Fight over Forests and the Rising Tyranny of Ecology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Clayton, Cornell, and May, David A. 1999. A Political Regimes Approach to the Analysis of Legal Decisions. Polity 32 (2): 233–52.Google Scholar
Coppedge, Michael. 2005. Explaining Democratic Deterioration in Venezuela through Nested Induction. In The Third Wave of Democratization in Latin America, ed. Hagopian, Frances and Mainwaring, Scott, 289–316. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Coyle, Dennis J. 1994. “This Land Is My Land, This Land Is Your Land”: Cultural Conflict in Environmental and Land Use Regulation. In Politics, Policy, & Culture, ed. Coyle, Dennis J. and Ellis, Richard J., 33–50. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Cross, Frank B., and Tiller, Emerson H. 1998. Judicial Partisanship and Obedience to Legal Doctrine: Whistleblowing on the Federal Courts of Appeals. Yale Law Journal 107 (7): 2155–76.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1957. Decision‐Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy Maker. Journal of Public Law 6:279–95.Google Scholar
Dion, Douglas. 1998. Evidence and Inference in the Comparative Case Study. Comparative Politics 30 (January): 127–45.Google Scholar
Eckstein, Harry. 1992 1975. Case Study and Theory in Political Science. In Regarding Politics: Essays on Political Theory, Stability, and Change, 117–76. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, Richard J. 1998. The Dark Side of the Left: Illiberal Egalitarianism in America. Lawrence: Kansas University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, Richard J., and Thompson, Fred. 1997. Culture and the Environment in the Pacific Northwest. American Political Science Review 91 (4): 885–97.Google Scholar
Eskridge, William Jr. 1991. Overriding Supreme Court Statutory Interpretation Decisions. Yale Law Journal 101:331–455.Google Scholar
Eskridge, William N. Jr., and Ferejohn, John. 2005. Quasi‐Constitutional Law: The Rise of Super‐Statutes. In Congress and the Constitution, ed. Devins, Neal and Whittington, Keith E., 198–219. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Espy, Mike, and Babbitt, Bruce. 1994. Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture and US Department of the Interior.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm M. 1992. Hollow Hopes, Flypaper, and Metaphors. Law and Social Inquiry 17 (4): 745–60.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm M., and Rubin, Edward L. 1998. Judicial Policy Making and the Modern State: How the Courts Reformed America's Prisons. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Flemming, Roy B., Bohte, John, and Wood, B. Dan 1998. One Voice Among Many: The Supreme Court's Influence on Attentiveness to Issues in the United States, 1947–1992. In Leveraging the Law: Using the Courts to Achieve Social Change, ed. Schultz, David A., 21–61. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, Bent. 2004. Five Misunderstandings about Case‐study Research. In Qualitative Research Practice, ed. Seale, Clive, Gobo, Giampietro, Gubrium, Jaber F., and Silverman, David, 420–34. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team. 1993. Forest Ecosystem Management: An Ecological, Economic, and Social Assessment. Washington, DC: US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and National Marine Fisheries Service; US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management; US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service; US Department of the Interior, National Park Service; Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
Frymer, Paul. 2003. Acting When Elected Officials Won't: Federal Courts and Civil Rights Enforcement in US Labor Unions, 1935–85. American Political Science Review 97 (3): 483–99.Google Scholar
George, Alexander L., and Bennett, Andrew. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gerring, John. 2004. What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for? American Political Science Review 98 (2): 341–54.Google Scholar
Gerring, John. 2007a. Is There a (Viable) Crucial‐Case Method? Comparative Political Studies 40 (3): 231–53.Google Scholar
Gerring, John. 2007b. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gottschall, Jon. 1986. Reagan's Appointments to the US Courts of Appeals: The Continuation of a Judicial Revolution. Judicature 70 (1): 49–54.Google Scholar
Hausegger, Lori, and Baum, Lawrence. 1998. Behind the Scenes: The Supreme Court and Congress in Statutory Interpretation. In Great Theatre: The American Congress in the 1990s, ed. Weisberg, Herbert F. and Patterson, Samuel C., 224–47. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haynes, Richard W., Bormann, Bernard T., Lee, Danny C., and Martin, Jon R. 2006. Northwest Forest Plan—The First 10 Years (1994–2003): Synthesis of Monitoring and Research Results. General Technical Report PNW‐GTR‐651. Portland, OR: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.Google Scholar
Hettinger, Virginia A., and Zorn, Christopher J. W. 2005. Explaining the Incidence and Timing of Congressional Responses to the US Supreme Court. Legislative Studies Quarterly 30 (1): 5–28.Google Scholar
Hoberg, George. 1997. From Localism to Legalism: The Transformation of Federal Forest Policy. In Western Public Lands and Environmental Politics, ed. Davis, Charles, 47–73. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Kagan, Robert A. 2001. Adversarial Legalism: The American Way of Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kagan, Robert A. 2004. American Courts and the Policy Dialogue: The Role of Adversarial Legalism. In Making Policy, Making Law: An Interbranch Perspective, ed. Miller, Mark C. and Barnes, Jeb, 13–34. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Kagan, Robert A. 2006. Foreword to Cultural Analysis: Politics, Public Law, and Administration, by Aaron Wildavsky , ed. Swedlow, Brendon, 121–27. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Kaufman, Herbert. 1960. The Forest Ranger: A Study in Administrative Behavior. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
Keck, Thomas M. 2009. Beyond Backlash: Assessing the Impact of Judicial Decisions on LGBT Rights. Law and Society Review 43 (1): 151–85.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Keohane, Robert O., and Verba, Sidney. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kingdon, John. 1995. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policy, 2nd ed. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Klarman, Michael J. 1994. Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement. Virginia Law Review 80:7–150.Google Scholar
Klarman, Michael J. 2004. From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, Robert G. 1990. Broken Trust, Broken Land: Freeing Ourselves from the War Over the Environment. Wilsonville, OR: Bookpartners.Google Scholar
Lieberman, Evan S. 2005. Nested Analysis as a Mixed‐Method Strategy for Comparative Research. American Political Science Review 99 (3): 435–52.Google Scholar
Mather, Lynn. 1998. Theorizing about Trial Courts: Lawyers, Policymaking, and Tobacco Litigation. Law & Social Inquiry 23 (4): 897–940.Google Scholar
McCann, Michael W. 1992. Reform Litigation on Trial. Law & Social Inquiry 17 (4): 715–43.Google Scholar
McCann, Michael W. 1994. Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
McKeown, Timothy. 1999. Case Studies and the Statistical World View. International Organization 53 (Winter): 161–90.Google Scholar
McMahon, Kevin J., and Paris, Michael. 1998. The Politics of Rights Revisited: Rosenberg, McCann, and the New Institutionalism. In Leveraging the Law: Using the Courts to Achieve Social Change, ed. Schultz, David A., 63–134. New York: Peter Lang. Publishing.Google Scholar
Melnick, R. Shep. 1994. Between the Lines: Interpreting Welfare Rights. Washington, DC: Brookings.Google Scholar
Melnick, R. Shep. 1996. Federalism and the New Rights. Yale Law & Policy Review/Yale Journal on Regulation Symposium 14 (1): 325–54.Google Scholar
Miller, Elaine P. 1996. The pen is mightier than the chainsaw: Newspaper coverage of the “conflict” between the lumber industry and spotted owls in the Pacific Northwest. MA thesis, Department of Geography, Cambridge University, England.Google Scholar
Moore, W. John. 1992. Righting the Courts. National Journal (January 25).Google Scholar
Nash, Roderick Frazier. 1989. The Rights of Nature: A History of Environmental Ethics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Pickerill, J. Mitchell. 2005. Congressional Responses to Judicial Review. In Congress and the Constitution, ed. Devins, Neal and Whittington, Keith E., 151–72. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Pickerill, J. Mitchell, and Clayton, Cornell W. 2004. The Rehnquist Court and the Political Dynamics of Federalism. Perspectives on Politics 2 (2): 233–48.Google Scholar
Pinello, Daniel R. 2006. America's Struggle for Same‐Sex Marriage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Reed, Douglas S. 1998. Twenty‐Five Years after Rodriguez: School Finance Litigation and the Impact of the New Judicial Federalism. Law & Society Review 32 (1): 175–220.Google Scholar
Reed, Douglas S. 2001. On Equal Terms: The Constitutional Politics of Educational Opportunity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Repetto, Robert, ed. 2006. Punctuated Equilibrium and the Dynamics of US Environmental Policy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Rodgers, William H. Jr. 1994. Environmental Law. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1991. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1992a. Hollow Hopes and Other Aspirations: A Reply to Feeley and McCann. Law & Social Inquiry 17 (4): 761–78.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1992b. Judicial Independence and the Reality of Political Power. The Review of Politics 54 (3): 369–98.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1994. Brown Is Dead! Long Live Brown!: The Endless Attempt to Canonize a Case. Virginia Law Review 80 (1): 161–71.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1995. The Real World of Constitutional Rights: The Supreme Court and the Implementation of the Abortion Decisions. In Contemplating Courts, ed. Epstein, Lee, 390–419. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1996. Positivism, Interpretivism, and the Study of Law. Law & Social Inquiry 21 (2): 435–55.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1998. Knowledge and Desire: Thinking about Courts and Social Change. In Leveraging the Law: Using the Courts to Achieve Social Change, ed. Schultz, David A., 251–89. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1999. African‐American Rights after Brown . Journal of Supreme Court History 24 (1): 201–25.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 2001. The Sorrow and the Pity: Kent State, Political Dissent, and the Misguided Worship of the First Amendment. In The Boundaries of Freedom of Expression & Order in American Democracy, ed. Hensley, Thomas R., 17–37. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 2004. Substituting Symbol for Substance: What Did Brown Really Accomplish? PS: Political Science & Politics 37 (2): 205–09.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 2006. Courting Disaster: Looking for Change in All the Wrong Places. Drake Law Review 54 (4): 795–829.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 2008. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Schacter, Jane S. 2006. Sexual Orientation, Social Change, and the Courts. Drake Law Review 54 (4): 861–83.Google Scholar
Schultz, David, and Gottlieb, Stephen E. 1998. Legal Functionalism and Social Change: A Reassessment of Rosenberg's Hollow Hope . In Leveraging the Law: Using the Courts to Achieve Social Change, ed. Schultz, David A., 169–213. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
Seawright, Jason, and Gerring, John. 2008. Case‐Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options. Political Research Quarterly 61 (June): 294–308.Google Scholar
Sher, Victor M. 1990. Ancient Forests, Spotted Owls, and the Demise of Federal Environmental Law. Environmental Law Reporter 20:104–69.Google Scholar
Sher, Victor M. 1993. Travels with Strix: The Spotted Owl's Journey through the Federal Courts. Public Land Law Review 14:41–79.Google Scholar
Sher, Victor M. 1997. Surveying the Wreckage: Lessons from the 104th Congress. Fordham Environmental Law Journal 8:589–606.Google Scholar
Sher, Victor M., and Stahl, Andy. 1990. Spotted Owls, Ancient Forests, Courts and Congress: An Overview of Citizens’ Efforts to Protect Old‐Growth Forests and the Species that Live in Them. Northwest Environmental Law Journal 6:261–364.Google Scholar
Sher, Victor M., and Hunting, Carol Sue. 1991. Eroding the Landscape, Eroding the Laws: Congressional Exemptions from Judicial Review of Environmental Laws. Harvard Environmental Law Review 15:435–91.Google Scholar
Solimine, Michael E., and Walker, James L. 1992. The Next Word: Congressional Response to Supreme Court Statutory Decisions. Temple Law Review 65:425–58.Google Scholar
Spiller, Pablo T., and Tiller, Emerson H. 1996. Invitations to Override: Congressional Reversals of Supreme Court Decisions. International Review of Law and Economics 16:503–21.Google Scholar
Swedlow, Brendon. 2002a. Scientists, judges, and spotted owls: Policymakers in the Pacific Northwest. PhD diss., Department of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Swedlow, Brendon. 2002b. Toward Cultural Analysis in Policy Analysis: Picking Up Where Aaron Wildavsky Left Off. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 4 (3): 267–85.Google Scholar
Swedlow, Brendon. 2003. Scientists, Judges, and Spotted Owls: Policymakers in the Pacific Northwest. Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum 8 (2): 187–278.Google Scholar
Swedlow, Brendon. 2007. Using the Boundaries of Science to do Boundary‐work among Scientists: Pollution and Purity Claims. Science and Public Policy 34 (9): 633–43.Google Scholar
Swedlow, Brendon. 2008. Beyond Liberal and Conservative: Two‐Dimensional Conceptions of Ideology and the Structure of Political Attitudes and Values. Journal of Political Ideologies 13 (2): 155–78.Google Scholar
Swedlow, Brendon, Kall, Denise, Zhou, Zheng, Hammitt, James K., and Wiener, Jonathan B. 2009. Theorizing and Generalizing about Risk Assessment and Regulation through Comparative Nested Analysis of Representative Cases. Law & Policy 31 (2): 236–69.Google Scholar
True, James L., Jones, Bryan D., and Baumgartner, Frank R. 2007. Punctuated Equilibrium Theory: Explaining Stability and Change in American Policymaking. In Theories of the Policy Process, 2nd ed., Sabatier, Paul A., 155–87. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 2006. The Role of Courts in Social Change: Looking Forward? Drake Law Review 54 (4): 909–22.Google Scholar
Van Dyk, Robert. 1998. The Pro‐Choice Legal Mobilization and the Decline of Clinic Blockades. In Leveraging the Law: Using the Courts to Achieve Social Change, ed. Schultz, David A., 135–67. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
Wasby, Stephen L. 1998. The Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court: Relations between higher and lower courts. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, September 3–6, Boston, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Whittington, Keith E. 2003. Legislative Sanctions and the Strategic Environment for Judicial Review. I Con: The International Journal of Constitutional Law 1 (3): 446–74.Google Scholar
Wildavsky, Aaron. 2006. Cultural Analysis: Politics, Public Law, and Administration, ed. Swedlow, Brendon. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Yaffee, Steven Lewis. 1994. The Wisdom of the Spotted Owl: Policy Lessons for a New Century. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
Zackin, Emily. 2008. Popular Constitutionalism's Hard When You're Not Very Popular: Why the ACLU Turned to Courts. Law & Society Review 42 (2): 367–96.Google Scholar
Zalman, Marvin. 1998. Juricide. In Leveraging the Law: Using the Courts to Achieve Social Change, ed. Schultz, David A., 293–313. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).Google Scholar
Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984).Google Scholar
Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402 (1971).Google Scholar
Douglas County v. Lujan, 810 F. Supp. 1470 (D. Or. 1992).Google Scholar
Lane County Audubon Society v. Jamison, 1991 WL 354885 (D. Or. 1991).Google Scholar
Northern Spotted Owl v. Hodel, 716 F. Supp. 479 (W.D. Wash. 1988).Google Scholar
Northern Spotted Owl v. Lujan, 758 F. Supp. 621 (W.D. Wash. 1991).Google Scholar
Northwest Forest Resource Council v. Espy, 846 F. Supp. 1009 (D.D.C. 1994).Google Scholar
Portland Audubon Society v. Endangered Species Committee, 984 F.2d 1534 (9th Cir. 1993).Google Scholar
Portland Audubon Society v. Hodel, 866 F.2d 302 (9th Cir. 1989).Google Scholar
Portland Audubon Society v. Lujan, 21 ELR 20018 (D. Or. 1989a).Google Scholar
Portland Audubon Society v. Lujan, 712 F. Supp. 1465 (D. Or. 1989b).Google Scholar
Portland Audubon Society v. Lujan, 884 F.2d 1233 (9th Cir. 1989c).Google Scholar
Robertson v. Seattle Audubon Society, 501 U.S. 1249 (1991) (granting certiorari). Robertson v. Seattle Audubon Society, 503 U.S. 429 (1992).Google Scholar
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).Google Scholar
Seattle Audubon Society v. Evans, 771 F. Supp. 1081 (W.D. Wash. 1991).Google Scholar
Seattle Audubon Society v. Lyons, 871 F. Supp. 1286 (D.C. Cir. 1994a).Google Scholar
Seattle Audubon Society v. Lyons, 871 F. Supp. 1291 (W.D. Wash. 1994b).Google Scholar
Seattle Audubon Society v. Moseley, 798 F. Supp. 1473 (W.D. Wash. 1992).Google Scholar
Seattle Audubon Society v. Robertson, 914 F.2d 1311 (9th Cir. 1990).Google Scholar
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. 435 U.S. 519 (1978).Google Scholar
Washington Audubon Society v. Robertson, 1991 WL 180099 (W.D. Wash. 1991).Google Scholar

Statutes Cited

Administrative Procedure Act of 1946, 5 U.S.C. § 500.Google Scholar
Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. § 1531.Google Scholar
National Environmental Policy Act of 1970, 42 U.S.C. § 4321.Google Scholar
National Forest Management Act of 1976, 16 U.S.C. § 1600.Google Scholar