Challenge to Bureau of Land Management's Approval of Natural Gas Field, and Administrative and Civil Rights Matters - Civil Rights Law - DC Circuit
DC Circuit - The FindLaw DC Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog

Challenge to Bureau of Land Management's Approval of Natural Gas Field, and Administrative and Civil Rights Matters

Boniface v. Dept. of Homeland Sec., No. 09-1095, involved a petition for review of a 2009 order of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), an agency within the Department of Homeland Security, denying petitioner's request for waiver of a rule barring him from receiving a hazardous materials endorsement (HME) for his commercial driver's license because of his 1975 conviction for possession of an unregistered explosive device.  The court of appeals granted the petition, on the grounds that 1) petitioner could not collaterally attack his conviction in pursuit of an HME; 2) the regulation at issue did not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause; but 3) the TSA was arbitrary and capricious in treating his appeal as a request for a waiver and simultaneously denying that request.

NLRB v. Fed. Lab. Rel. Auth., No. 09-1119, involved the National Labor Relations Board's petition for review of an order of the Federal Labor Relations Authority holding the Board engaged in an unfair labor practice, because it unlawfully refused to negotiate with the intervenor, the National Labor Relations Board Union, which the Authority had certified as the exclusive representative of a bargaining unit that included employees who reported to the Board and employees who reported to the General Counsel of the Board.  The court of appeals granted the petition on the ground that the inclusion of Board-side and General Counsel-side employees in a single bargaining unit conflicted with the separation of authority mandated by section 3(d) of its charter, the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. section 153(d), by requiring the General Counsel to bargain jointly with the Board over his employees' conditions of employment.

National Corn Growers Ass'n v. EPA, No. 09-1284, concerned a petition for review by the National Corn Growers Association, the National Sunflower Association, the National Potato Council, and FMC Corporation of the order of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) denying their objections to the EPA's Final Regulation revoking all "tolerances" for the pesticide carbofuran.  The court of appeals granted the petition in part on the ground that the EPA's decision to revoke import tolerances for carbofuran was arbitrary and capricious.  However, the court denied the petition in part on the ground that the EPA did not abuse its discretion by denying the petitioners' requests for a hearing on other issues, because they were not by themselves outcome-determinative.

Theodore Roosevelt Conservation P'ship v. Salazar, No. 09-5162, involved an action by environmental organizations filed for declaratory and injunctive relief arguing that the Bureau of Land Management's Record of Decision, its accompanying environmental impact statement (EIS), and subsequent drilling permits for a natural gas field violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act.

LeFande v. Dist. of Columbia, No. 09-7080, concerned an action alleging that the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) violated the First Amendment by terminating plaintiff's position with the MPD Reserve Corps in retaliation for his making protected speech.  The court of appeals reversed the dismissal of the action on the ground that the district court erred in holding that plaintiff's speech did not relate to a matter of public concern and was therefore not protected by the First Amendment.

Related Resources