Andrus v. Allard

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that abrogating the right to sell endangered eagles' feathers did not implicate the Fifth Amendment
• holding that abrogating the right to sell endangered eagles’ feathers did not implicate the Fifth Amendment
• holding that the “text, context, and purpose of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act support the Secretary’s interpretive regulations.”
• noting that the BGEPA and the MBTA are \designed to prevent the destruction of certain species of birds\
• noting that the BGEPA and the MBTA are “designed to prevent the destruction of certain species of birds”
• holding that a total prohibition on the sale of eagle feathers was not a taking even though the restriction denied certain commercial traders the right to sell property acquired prior to the enactment of the restriction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).