- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Alaska
- /
- Alaska Wilderness League v. Jewell
Alaska Wilderness League v. Jewell
Geography
Year
2014
Document Type
Litigation
Part of
About this case
Filing year
2014
Status
Motion for injunction pending appeal denied.
Geography
Docket number
3:15-cv-00067-SLG
Court/admin entity
United States → United States District Court for the District of Alaska (D. Alaska)United States → United States Federal Courts
Case category
Federal Statutory Claims (US) → Endangered Species Act and Other Wildlife Protection Statutes (US)
Principal law
United States → Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)United States → National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
At issue
Challenge to regulations authorizing take of Pacific walruses incidental to offshore oil and gas operations.
Topics
, ,
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
Beta
07/23/2015
Motion for injunction pending appeal denied.
Decision
07/22/2015
Reply filed by plaintiffs in support of motion for injunction pending appeal.
Reply
07/08/2015
Motion for injunction pending appeal filed by plaintiffs.
Motion
07/02/2015
Order regarding cross-motions for summary judgment issued.
The court upheld the regulation authorizing incidental take of Pacific walruses, including the issuance of a finding of no significant impact.
Decision
11/10/2014
Complaint filed.
Environmental groups filed a complaint in the federal district court for the District of Columbia to challenge a regulation that permitted the incidental take of Pacific walruses in connection with offshore oil exploration activities in the Chukchi Sea off the Alaskan coast. The permit was issued under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The plaintiffs also alleged that the permit's issuance violated the National Environmental Policy Act. The plaintiffs contended, among other things, that the regulation would allow the oil industry to exacerbate stresses Pacific walruses were already experiencing due to the melting of sea ice "at unprecedented rates due to human-induced climate change." The plaintiffs said that the regulation improperly deferred analysis and mitigation of impacts on the walruses. The action was transferred to the District for Alaska.
Complaint
Summary
Challenge to regulations authorizing take of Pacific walruses incidental to offshore oil and gas operations.
Topics mentioned most in this case Beta
See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more
Group
Topics
Policy instrument
Risk
Impacted group
Just transition
Renewable energy
Fossil fuel
Greenhouse gas
Economic sector
Finance