- Current Louisiana governor has brought back parishes’ coastal-erosion suits against oil companies [Erin Mundahl, Inside Sources]
- Roundup saga: EPA says glyphosate not likely to be carcinogenic to people [Tom Polansek, Reuters, earlier]
- “Can Land Uninhabitable by an Endangered Species Nonetheless Be ‘Critical Habitat’ Under the Endangered Species Act?” Supreme Court grants cert in Weyerhaeuser v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [Jonathan Adler]
- “Oakland Would Pay 23.5% Of Recovery From Its Global Warming Lawsuit To Private Lawyers” [John O’Brien, Legal Newsline; more, John Burnett, Washington Examiner]
- Does this mean casually picking a feather up off the ground will no longer merit prison time? Department of Interior announces new interpretation of migratory bird law meant to bring sense to “incidental take” issue;
- For elephant conservation, sustainable use based on property rights might lead to better results than trade bans [Branden Jung, Wisconsin Law Review/SSRN]
2 Comments
a) Perhaps the USF&WS should have declared downtown Manhattan a “Critical Habitat” for the Snail Darter.
b) If Oakland recovers nothing, how much do the private lawyers receive?
c) What are the odds that Oakland recovers more than nothing? Do they even have a chance at getting to a decision on the merits?