Remove Alaska Remove Court Decisions Remove Drafting Remove Statute
article thumbnail

Are Alaska Native corporations Indian tribes? A multimillion-dollar question

SCOTUSBlog

Share Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims in Alaska — “Indian tribe[s]” under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act? On Monday, the Supreme Court will hear argument on that question in Yellen v.

article thumbnail

April 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

In Minnesota, the district court granted the State of Minnesota’s motion to remand its case, which asserts state law claims under common law and consumer protection statutes. s consumer protection statute. On March 26, 2021, the court denied Exxon’s emergency motion for a temporary stay of the remand order. Alaska Mar.

Court 115
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

January 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM) approval of an offshore drilling and production facility off the coast of Alaska in the Beaufort Sea, finding that BOEM failed to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Alaska, filed Dec.

Court 52
article thumbnail

October 2020 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

1442, or the civil-rights removal statute, 28 U.S.C. The district court rejected eight grounds for removal, but the Fourth Circuit concluded its appellate jurisdiction was limited to determining whether the companies properly removed the case under the federal-officer removal statute. Alaska, filed Sept. 19-1189 (U.S.

Court 72
article thumbnail

December 2020 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

The court concluded that the Freedom of Information Act’s deliberative process privilege shielded the redactions from disclosure. The court rejected DLNR’s argument that a 2017 Hawaii Supreme Court decision requiring environmental review for aquarium fishing only applied to fishing with fine-meshed nets. 3:20-cv-00290 (D.

Court 55