Asian Carp litigation: expect news on Monday
Similar pages:
- Blog of law articles: Renewed litigation in the Asian Carp dispute
- Blog of law articles: Asian Carp litigation: The US Supreme Court denies the motion
- Blog of law articles: Asian Carp litigation: preliminary injuction dismissed - again
- Blog of law articles: Asian Carp litigation: Renewed preliminary injuction dismissed
- Blog of law articles: The Asian carp dispute: background info
- Blog of law articles: Renewed motion to the US Supreme Court to stop the Asian carp
The U.S.A. Supreme Court decides today whether to reopen the original case and decree concerning the Chicago Ship and Sanitary Canal (Wisconsin et al. v. Illinois et al.).
Usually, orders from Friday are released on Monday. The Court's decision will shape further actions in the Asian Carp crisis, and hopefully the Great Lakes Law Blog will provide legal insights into what can be expected in the near future.
An article by Gabriel Nelson in the New York Times informs that more litigation before lower State or Federal Courts will follow if the Supreme Court declines to reopen the case. According to the article, one potential plaintiff could be Canada.
It would be surprising to see Canada enter the fray in this file, as Ontario has been the point authority in charge since the beginning of the Asian Carp crisis on the Canadian side: Ontario is the only Canadian stakeholder to have filed a memorandum before the Supreme Court, and bilateral federal/provincial agreements with the federal government of Canada might indicate that Ontario could take responsibility in Great Lakes management matters.
In any case, these potential developments might answer the question raised by this older post on the potential use of the recourse provided under Section 7.3 of the 2008 Great Lakes Compact by one of the Canadian Provinces.
While a refusal to reopen the original case and decree might induce significant delays potentially disastrous for the Great Lakes ecosystem, it might also rebalance the 13 December 2005 Great Lakes-St Lawrence River Basin Sustainable Water Resources Agreement which, from an institutional perspective, is tilted in favour of American interest due to U.S.A. Supreme Court original jurisdiction.
If the Court declines jurisdiction, it could be argued that the potential for federal judicial interference decreases, thereby putting the riparian States and Provinces on a more equal footing and more firmly in charge of their basin.
More related web entries for - Asian Carp litigation: expect news on Monday:
- undefined
- The Asian carp dispute: background info
- Renewed motion to the US Supreme Court to stop the Asian carp
- Asian Carp litigation: preliminary injuction dismissed
- Ontario's brief in the Asian Carp dispute
- Asian invasion in the North American Great Lakes
- Asian Carp litigation: preliminary injuction dismissed - again
- Asian Carp litigation: Renewed preliminary injuction dismissed
- U.S. congressional committee report on chemichals used in fracking fluids
- Shale gas exploitation and public interest in Texas
- Confirmation of agreement on the management of Lake Champlain
- Test for intervention in US Supreme Court original action
- Water rights as constraint on nuclear plant project in Utah
- Financial risks in water utilities: Report from Ceres
- Drinking water fluoride content level to be lowered in the U.S.A.?
- New water law blog
- Article on Water Energy Nexus
This entry was posted on at 12:32 AM and is filed under Asian Carp, Interstate water disputes, North American Great Lakes, U.S.A.. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response.
- No comments yet.
VIP Followers
Info recommended by:
Webpages of law
Popular entries
-
Several in-the-know readers have passed along an incendiary anonymous memo making the rounds among administrators and trustees regarding fin...
-
(BY HUGO) Environmental Defence Canada recently published a report, Down the Drain: Water Conservation in the Great Lakes Basin , that shows...
-
(BY HUGO) The Ministry of Sustainable Development, Environment and Parks has published 2 new project regulations . One is to amend the Regul...
-
To paraphrase Mark Harris , it seems that Scott Rothstein continues to rule our world. Here's the latest: 1. Bill Scherer sues the fir...
-
My students and readers of this blog know my support for Dana Corp 's approach to ensure that employees' right to select union r...
-
Acting NLRB General Counsel Lafe Solomon has issued a report on social media cases. Anyone who fails to consider the NLRA in general and the...
-
So who else is going to the Federation Judicial Reception tonight: This year’s Judicial Reception will recognize three outstanding legal pr...
-
When I first read this story about a potential conflict of interest involving the "extremely Floridian" GrayRobinson that is bei...
-
(BY HUGO) On 27 October 2010, Professor Jake Peters from the USGS Georgia Water Science Centre will give a conference on inter-state tension...
-
I know how much Judge Silverman loves to preserve and celebrate our heritage, particularly as it relates to the courts and our rich South Fl...