Revisiting the Tense Relationship between the U.S. Supreme Court, Administrative Procedure and the National Environmental Policy Act
Jason J. Czarnezki
Vermont Law School - Environmental Law Center
Stanford Environmental Law Journal, Vol. 26, 2006
Marquette Law School Legal Studies Paper No. 06-09
This Article questions whether courts should engage in a more searching review of whether agencies, in fact, have given any weight to the environmental consequences or alternatives of their proposed actions. In other words, might giving zero weight to environmental factors in practice, despite their inclusion in the decision-making documents, violate the arbitrary and capricious standard of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)? The piece further examines the tension between the role of the APA and the U.S. Supreme Court's NEPA jurisprudence, and concludes that - despite the Supreme Court's crippling of NEPA - an agency's failure to give any weight to project alternatives and environmental concerns in the decision-making process would be unreasonable under the APA, and suggests indicators for determining whether such a failure has taken place.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 26
Keywords: NEPA, APA, arbitrary, capricious
JEL Classification: K23Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: June 27, 2005
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.375 seconds