Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment
Murray Energy Corp. v. Environmental Protection Agency
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided June 9, 2015No. Nos. 14-1112, 14-1151, 14-1146Published
1Concurring in the judgmentKaren Lecraft Henderson, Circuit Judge
I agree that the petitioners in No. 14-1146 do not have standing to challenge the settlement agreement. I also agree that we do not have jurisdiction to hear the petition for review in No. 14-1151 because the proposed rule that the petitioners challenge is non-final agency action. And while I too would deny the application for a writ of prohibition in No. 14-1112, I *406write separately to distance myself from my colleagues’ cramped view of our extraordinary writ authority.
The All Writs Act gives this Court the power to issue “all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of [its] respective…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Califano v. YamasakiSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Weinberger v. Romero-BarceloSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Cheney v. United States District Court for District of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Federal Trade Commission v. Dean Foods Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Roche v. Evaporated Milk Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.