Building Industry Legal Defense Foundation v. Norton

How courts have described this case

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

• holding the FWS’s choice of methodology in that case “constitute[d] serious substantive errors, not mere procedural flaws, and hence warrant[ed] vacatur”
• finding 31 month proposed time frame “too long” and requiring FWS to promulgate new critical habitat designations within 21 months despite agency’s “resource allocation issues”
• “In assessing the ‘disruptive consequences’ of vacatur, the Court cannot rely upon inter-venors’ abstract policy arguments ....” (internal citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).