Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database

Protect Our Parks, Inc. v. Buttigieg

Protect Our Parks, Inc. v. Buttigieg ↗

22-3190United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (7th Cir.)1 entry
Filing Date
Document
Type
04/08/2024
District court's judgment for defendants affirmed.
Decision

Protect Our Parks, Inc. v. Buttigieg ↗

21-2449United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (7th Cir.)2 entries
Filing Date
Document
Type
07/01/2022
Denial of motion for preliminary injunction affirmed.
Decision
08/19/2021
Opinion issued explaining decision to deny motion to enjoin construction pending appeal.
Decision

Protect Our Parks, Inc. v. Buttigieg ↗

1:21-cv-02006United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (N.D. Ill.)3 entries
Filing Date
Document
Type
03/29/2022
Counts VI, VIII, IX, XI, XII, XIII, and XV dismissed with prejudice and Count VII dismissed without prejudice.
Decision
08/12/2021
Memorandum opinion and order issued stating reasons for court's denial of motion for preliminary injunction.
Decision
04/14/2021
Complaint filed.
Two not-for-profit organizations and five individuals filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois asserting that federal approvals of the construction of the Obama Presidential Center in Jackson Park in Chicago failed to comply with “the letter and spirit” of federal statutes, including Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act. The plaintiffs’ allegations also included that the Obama Presidential Center would have significant and permanent impacts on the Great Lakes Fishery and Ecosystem Restoration Project at Jackson Park, a large project led by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and designed to address climate change’s impacts on the South Side of Chicago, among other environmental functions. The plaintiffs asserted that the Corps’ approval of modifications to the project violated the Rivers and Harbors Act and the Clean Water Act.
Complaint