News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Appeals › US Army Corps of Engineers

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Vinson & Elkins LLP

The New NEPA: Federal Agencies Overhaul Procedures for Environmental Reviews

Vinson & Elkins LLP on

On July 3, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC” or the “Commission”), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Army Corps”), and the Departments of Energy (“DOE”), Interior (“DOI”), Transportation (“DOT”),...more

Mintz

We already knew many Federal Judges weren't deferring to EPA, now the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals isn't deferring to Judges...

Mintz on

Just before the holidays I wrote about three Judges of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals who decided, over the Army Corps of Engineers' objection, to apply the Supreme Court's Sackett test for determining whether something...more

Perkins Coie

Federal Circuit Holds “Sum Certain” Requirement in Government Contracts Cases Is Nonjurisdictional

Perkins Coie on

Clarifying a significant issue in government contracts litigation against the government, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that the so-called “sum certain” requirement for Contract Disputes Act (CDA)...more

ArentFox Schiff

Investigations Newsletters: US Supreme Court Requests Solicitor General's Views in FCA Rule 9(b) Context

ArentFox Schiff on

US Supreme Court Requests Solicitor General’s Views in FCA Rule 9(b) Context - On May 16, 2022, the US Supreme Court requested a brief from the US Solicitor General on the level particularly required by Federal Rule of...more

Holland & Hart LLP

More Uncertainty Ahead – WOTUS, SCOTUS and What it Means for Your Project

Holland & Hart LLP on

Since 2015, jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act (CWA or the Act) has been in a near constant state of flux, creating a challenging regulatory landscape for project developers and the regulatory community. The last few...more

Holland & Hart LLP

Feeling Underwater? A Brief Look at Recent Clean Water Act Developments

Holland & Hart LLP on

It is becoming increasingly difficult for the regulated community to stay abreast of state and federal environmental regulatory developments, particularly as they are decided in court. The following alert summarizes some...more

Snell & Wilmer

SCOTUS Sends WOTUS Back TO District Courts

Snell & Wilmer on

On January 22, 2018, in National Association of Manufacturers v. Department of Defense, the United States Supreme Court held unanimously that challenges to the federal Clean Water Act’s 2015 Waters of the United States...more

Perkins Coie

Supreme Court Sends Challenges to Clean Water Rule to Federal District Courts

Perkins Coie on

In a unanimous decision on January 22, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that challenges to the Obama administration’s 2015 Clean Water Rule must be brought in federal district courts rather than directly in the courts of appeals....more

Husch Blackwell LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Sends Waters of the US Rule to District Courts; Nationwide Stay in Question

Husch Blackwell LLP on

On January 22, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that challenges to the 2015 Waters of the United States Rule (the “WOTUS Rule” or “Rule”) belong in district court rather than the appellate court. The WOTUS Rule...more

Snell & Wilmer

Up to the Minute Synopsis of Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Developments

Snell & Wilmer on

Keeping track of the ongoing administrative and judicial developments on the issue of Clean Water Act jurisdiction has become almost as complex as trying to make a jurisdictional determination itself. Here is a handy synopsis...more

Pillsbury - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real...

Environmental Case Law Update – 1st Six Months of 2017

Pillsbury - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real... on

On March 21, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided the case of National Labor Relations Board v. SW General, Inc. This case concerns the operation and application of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 (FVRA). ...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - May 2016 #4

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued decisions in three cases on May 31, 2016: Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes, No. 15-290: Three mining companies sought a permit under the Clean Water Act seeking to...more

Snell & Wilmer

In a Victory for Businesses and Developers, the United States Supreme Court Holds that Clean Water Act Jurisdictional...

Snell & Wilmer on

The United States Supreme Court ruled today that an approved jurisdictional determination under the Clean Water Act constitutes an immediately appealable agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 500...more

Burr & Forman

Supreme Court Will Determine Whether Corps Jurisdictional Determination Can Be Appealed

Burr & Forman on

Can you appeal a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ jurisdictional determination (“JD”) that a water feature constitutes waters of the United States? The Administrative Procedures Act allows such an appeal if it is determined that...more

Williams Mullen

Is that Wetland Jurisdictional? A Practical Guide to the New Clean Water Rule

Williams Mullen on

The Clean Water Rule recently issued by EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers defines the scope of federal jurisdiction over wetlands and other “waters of the United States.”[1] It’s effective on August 28, 2015, so you need...more

Foley Hoag LLP - Environmental Law

More on the Reach of Sackett: Corps Jurisdictional Determinations Are Not Final Agency Action

Foley Hoag LLP - Environmental Law on

Early last month, we noted that the decision in Luminant v. EPA suggested that the reach of the Supreme Court decision in Sackett is not unlimited. The Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit agrees. In Belle Company v. Corps of...more

16 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide