City of Tacoma v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a challenge to a FERC order gave us jurisdiction to review a predicate biological opinion prepared by another agency
• stating that when certification turns on questions of state law, FERC defers to the final decision of the state
• noting that “[i]f the question regarding the state's [§] 401 certification is not the application of state water quality standards but compliance with the terms of [§] 401, then FERC must address it”
• “In most cases, if a party seeks to challenge a state certification issued pursuant to section 401, it must do so through the state courts.”
• “[T]he action agency must not blindly adopt the conclusions of the consultant agency, citing that agency’s expertise. Rather, the ultimate responsibility for compliance with the [Endangered Species Act] falls on the action agency.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).