City of Roseville 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 agency satisfied 40 C.F.R. § 1506.5(a)-(b) where record showed contractor worked with agency employees on EA and included “extensive copies of email communications between the agency staff discussing their comments on, and edits of, the EA”
• “[I]t is clear that land taken into trust for Indians does not create an exclusive federal enclave. Consequently, the Enclaves [sic] Clause is not implicated[.]”
• “There is scarce case law interpreting the enclaves clause.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).