Legal Opinion

Natural Resources Defense Coun v. Kenneth Salazar

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided April 16, 2014No. 09-17661PublishedCited by 54 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

M. SMITH, Circuit Judge:

In this appeal, we address the requirement under Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq., that federal agencies must consult with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service (Service) prior to taking any agency action that could affect an endangered or threatened species or its critical habitat. We reaffirm that Section 7(a)(2) requires such consultation, so long as the agency has “some discretion” to take action for the benefit…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Tennessee Valley Authority v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. North Carolina v. RiceSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  5. DeFunis v. OdegaardSupreme Court of the United States · 1974

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. State of California v. the Little Sisters of the PoorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
  2. Cottonwood Environmental Law Center v. United States Forest ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
  3. Friends of the Santa Clara v. US Army Corps of EngineersCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
  4. National Family Farm Coalition v. UsepaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
  5. Alliance for Wild Rockies v. United States Department of AgricultureCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014

49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API