Weekly litigation report — March 4, 2017

POTUS on WOTUS: “It’s a horrible, horrible rule. Has sort of a nice name, but everything else is bad.” Victory in California Supreme Court on Coho Salmon delisting petition Petition for rehearing filed in tax foreclosure scheme Supreme Court denies … Continue reading

The Administration calls for review of flawed WOTUS rule!

The President issued an Executive Order today calling for the EPA to review and revise the indefensible Army Corps and EPA rule redefining “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) subject to federal control under the Clean Water Act. I can … Continue reading

Weekly litigation update — February 25, 2017

Commonsense  result in New York In Oddo v. Queens Village Committee for Mental Health for Jamaica Community Adolescent Program, New York’s highest appellate court ruled here that a half-way house for drug addicts is not liable when a former resident, who … Continue reading

California can’t stifle open-shop speech just because it doesn’t like the content

Today we filed our notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit on behalf of Associated Builders & Contractors of California Cooperation Committee (ABC-CCC).  ABC-CCC is an organization that advocates on behalf of the “open-shop” industry—that is, on behalf of entities … Continue reading

Bureaucratic overreach and the separation of powers

Can federal agencies make up whatever policies they like unless Congress tells them not to? PLF answered an emphatic “no” in an amicus brief filed today to support a petition to the Supreme Court. In National Restaurant Assocation v. Department … Continue reading

Weekly litigation report — February 18, 2017

Absent Gopher Frog headed to Supreme Court The Fifth Circuit in an 8 to 6 decision declined to rehear the case of the frog that isn’t there, Markle Investments v. United States Fish & Wildlife Service. The problem in this … Continue reading

Over the top “critical habitat” regulations at risk of extinction

In a recent post, I discussed our Markle case in which PLF sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for grossly exceeding its authority under the Endangered Species Act. In June of 2012, the Service blatantly ignored the express language … Continue reading

Gopher frog case to the Supreme Court

Four years ago, PLF filed suit in federal court on behalf of landowners, Markle Interests, LLC., whose property was designated “critical habitat” by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Under the Endangered Species Act, “critical habitat” includes only those areas … Continue reading