Ad Hoc Metals Coalition v. Whitman

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that a particular document “will not be excluded simply because defendants claim that they did not ‘rely’ upon it”
• denying plaintiffs’ request to supplement the record with internal EPA emails exchanged during rulemaking process
• completing record with transcript of workshop comments from outside experts where agency acknowledged reviewing transcript
• supplementing the record with comments submitted during agency sponsored meeting where exclusion could not be reconciled with presence in the record of analogous materials from a similar meeting
• requiring the agency to supplement the administrative record with a transcript reflecting presentations of technical issues at a workshop sponsored by the' agency, where the transcript was “directly related to the issue decided in the final rule” and “adverse to the agency’s position”
• judicial review under APA is concerned with “an agency’s stated justifications, not the predecisional process that led up to the final, articulated decision.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).