首页> 外文期刊>The Environmental Law Reporter >National Association of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife and the Meaning of Agency 'Discretion'
【24h】

National Association of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife and the Meaning of Agency 'Discretion'

机译:全国房屋建筑商协会诉野生动物保护者与代理机构“自由裁量权”的含义

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The Supreme Court's decision in National Ass'n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife left unresolved the question of the meaning of discretion and agency authority. This decision and ensuing litigation over the meaning of discretionary agency action could impact the fate of over 1,300 endangered and threatened species. In this Article, Linus Chen explains the circuit court split over the conflicting statutory requirements of ESA §7 and CWA §402(b) regarding consultation and agency discretion. He argues that the Court wrongly decided that EPA did not have to consider ESA §7 and the loss of §7 protections before delegating CWA permitting program authority to the states. He cautions that by dismissing the plain language of §7(a)(2) requiring consultations to occur for any action by the federal government, the Court has placed new attention on the issue of discretion, and that the Supreme Court s decision may only increase the trend of using discretion as a defense for agency action or inaction.
机译:最高法院在“全国房屋建筑商诉野生动物保护者”一案中的裁决尚未解决自由裁量权和代理机构的含义问题。这项决定以及随之而来的有关全权代理行动含义的诉讼可能会影响1,300多种濒临灭绝和受威胁物种的命运。在本文中,Linus Chen解释了巡回法院对ESA§7和CWA§402(b)关于咨询和代理自由裁量权的相互冲突的法定要求的分歧。他辩称,法院错误地认定EPA在将CWA允许计划授权授予各州之前不必考虑ESA§7和§7的保护丧失。他告诫说,法院驳回了第7(a)(2)条的通俗语言,要求联邦政府采取任何行动进行协商,这使法院对自由裁量权问题给予了新的关注,而最高法院的裁决只能增加使用自由裁量权作为代理机构作为或不作为的辩护的趋势。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号