Center for Auto Safety Sues over FOIA Fees

Yesterday we filed a complaint in federal district court in D.C. on behalf of the Center for Auto Safety, the leading automobile safety organization in the nation since 1970, against the Department of Treasury. The Center is seeking emails under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to and from Treasury Secretary Geithner and members of the Auto Safety Task Force related to the GM and Chrysler government bailouts, which left personal injury victims without any ability to sue if they are injured by defective GM and Chrysler vehicles purchased before the bailouts. The government has refused to provide the requested records unless the Center pays $33,980 for duplication, and has refused to grant the Center a public interest fee waiver. To assist the Center in shedding light on the government’s role in these extremely costly and controversial bankruptcy bailouts – bankrolled by taxpayers to the tune of $80 billion – our complaint seeks to have the fees for these documents waived.

Judge Denies Tobacco Industry’s Bid To Vacate Massive RICO Ruling

In March 2011, the tobacco companies filed a motion to vacate the district court’s seminal RICO ruling in United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 449 F.Supp.2d 1, 934 (D.D.C. 2006) on the ground that the recently enacted Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act eliminates any reasonable likelihood that defendants will engage in future RICO violations.  The 2006 ruling, issued after a nine-month trial and containing more than 4,000 findings of fact, was a substantial victory for the public health and the Public Health Intervenors who we represent.  Among other remedies, the court required the companies to stop using misleading health descriptors like “light” and “low tar” and to issue corrective statements concerning their fraud. Defendants sought vacatur of the court’s findings and remedies, but we and the United States argued that the new statute is not likely to prevent defendants from engaging in the future joint racketeering that the district court had determined, and the D.C. Circuit had affirmed, is likely to continue here.  In a decision issued last week, Judge Kessler agreed with our arguments, holding that “given the type of wrongdoing in which the Defendants have engaged [the Act] simply does not eradicate the likelihood that Defendants will continue to commit RICO violations.”  The opinion, United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., Civ. No. 99-2496 (GK) (D.D.C. June 1, 2011), is available here.

Comments Filed on Behalf of Twenty Conservation Groups on FWS Land-based Wind Energy Guidelines

Last week, we assisted in submitting comments on behalf of twenty organizations, including Friends of Blackwater, the Center for Biological Diversity, the Animal Welfare Institute, and the Wildlife Advocacy Project, on the Draft Voluntary Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines and the Draft Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). The two draft documents have been developed to identify ways to avoid and minimize wildlife impacts of land-based wind energy facilities.  The comments provide a series of detailed recommendations for the improvement of the guidelines and their effective implementation.  Specifically, the comments focus on the legal authority of FWS to make the requirements of the guidelines binding and undertake an analysis of the cumulative effects of the development of wind facilities.  Further, the comments address several important issues such as the need for developing a process to ensure the independence of biological consultants in project decision-making.  More information on the guidelines can be found here: http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/index.html

Almy to Speak at Northwestern Law

Jessica Almy has been invited to speak at Northwestern University School of Law, during its Animal Law Week (April 4 - April 7) hosted by Northwestern Law's Student Animal Legal Defense Fund (SALDF) chapter.  Almy will speak on Thursday, April 7th during the Wildlife Law event.  Her presentation will overview historical wildlife protection cases handled by Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal.  In addition, Almy will detail cases for which she is lead counsel, including a recent success restoring Endangered Species Act protections to the West Virginia Northern Flying Squirrel (Friends of Blackwater v. Salazar) and a current matter challenging approval of the Cape Wind offshore wind power facility for violating the Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and National Environmental Policy Act.  The event is scheduled to begin at 12:00pm, in Rubloff (RB) 150 (Northwestern University School of Law is located at 375 East Chicago Ave., Chicago, IL 60611).  For more information, please email Susan Kai (s-kai2012@nlaw.northwestern.edu).

Squirrel Victorious: Judge Restores Protections of Endangered Species Act

Representing Friends of Blackwater and four other plaintiffs, we prevailed in a federal district court lawsuit to restore the protections of the Endangered Species Act to the West Virginia Northern Flying Squirrel.  Judge Emmet Sullivan’s opinion, rendered late Friday, returned the Squirrel to the list of endangered species and affirmed that the government must follow the recovery plans it creates for endangered and threatened species.  The ruling means that scientifically-based recovery criteria for endangered and threatened species, once adopted in a formal recovery plan, cannot be ignored due to political motivation or simple bureaucratic expediency.  Rather, if an agency believes that such recovery criteria are in need of revision (which was not established for the squirrel) then the agency must do so pursuant to the publicly and scientifically accountable process embodied in the law.  The opinion, Friends of Blackwater v. Salazar, Civ. No. 09-2122 (D.D.C. Mar. 25, 2011), is available here.

Amicus Brief Filed in U.S. Supreme Court Case on the Application of Federal Common Law to Climate Change

Today we filed an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court on behalf of Defenders of Wildlife, the Center for Biological Diversity, and the National Wildlife Federation, supporting the State and Land Trust plaintiffs that brought suit challenging defendants’ substantial contributions to climate change as injurious to their proprietary and other interests that are being devastated by global warming and other climatic disturbances traceable to greenhouse gas emissions.  Specifically, our brief focuses on the threshold issue of standing in environmental cases, and argues that the plaintiffs adequately alleged all elements necessary for standing, especially in view of the limited nature of the Court’s inquiry in this case in light of the unique facts presented in this common law cause of action.  The oral argument will take place on April 19, 2011.

Lawsuit Filed Over San Francisco Killing of Endangered Species at Sharp Park Golf Course

Working with the Wild Equity Institute, we filed a lawsuit this week in federal district court in California over the San Francisco Recreation and Park Department’s unlawful “take” of federally protected species at Sharp Park golf course, a city-owned course located within Golden Gate National Recreation Area.  The Complaint alleges that in recent years, egg masses of the California red-legged frog have been jeopardized by the draining of wetlands to facilitate use of the golf course, and course operations also are causing the take of the endangered San Francisco garter snake, all in violation of the Endangered Species Act.  A copy of the Complaint is here.