Share this Post:

unEARTHED. The Earthjustice Blog

Supreme Indifference


    SIGN-UP for our latest news and action alerts:
   Please leave this field empty

Facebook Fans

Related Blog Entries

by Terry Winckler:
Massive Attacks on Environment Launched in Congress

Teabag by teabag, the anti-environment faction in the House of Representatives has filled its federal government spending bil...

by Patti Goldman:
Nature Is Up For A Vote Today In Congress

Forty years of environmental progress is under attack today by a vote in the House of Representative on a stop-gap funding measure to keep the federal...

by Audrey Carson:
Driven From Predator to Prey - Sharks Face Extinction

Every year, Discovery Channel’s Shark Week concludes its program with a familiar saying: “Sharks have more reason to fear us than we have ...

Earthjustice on Twitter

View Tom Turner's blog posts
25 June 2009, 4:39 PM
A thumping for environmental cases

Two long and thoughtful pieces today, one from the Daily Journal, the other from Greenwire, discuss in painful detail the thumping environmental cases suffered at the hands of the Supreme Court this term. In each case, the court overturned a pro-environment ruling from a court of appeals.

The first case involved whether the Navy must protect whales and dolphins from the effects of loud noises. The most recent case, an Earthjustice case as it happens, revolved around a permit the Corps of Engineers awarded to a mining company that allows the company to dispose of toxic mining wastes in an Alaskan lake. In between, the court found that environmental groups didn't have the right to challenge certain Forest Service regulations, that Shell Oil was not responsible for cleaning up a Superfund site in California, and that cost-benefit calculation at a New England powerplant was legal. The decision the court overturned in the last case, incidentally, was written by Sonia Sotomayor, who looks likely to become the next associate justice. In all five cases, the court upheld rules put forward by the Bush administration.

Unfortunately, this is not surprising. Twenty years ago, I helped write a piece (also called Supreme Indifference) for the magazine of the Natural Resources Defense Council. The lead authors, Roger Beers and Rick Sutherland, analyzed several years of Supreme Court rulings in cases brought under the National Environmental Policy Act—and found that the court had ruled against the environment in every single case, usually by unanimous vote.

The high court has actually had only one true environmental champion—William O. Douglas. Why this is is a mystery to me, at least. It's high time it changed.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <p> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

Type the characters you see in this picture. (verify using audio)
Type the characters you see in the picture above; if you can't read them, submit the form and a new image will be generated. Not case sensitive.