Defenders of Wildlife v. United States Department of the Navy

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that both a ROD and a Biological Opinion were final agency actions subject to judicial review
• stating that the agency’s action should not be disturbed where the agency came to a “rational conclusion.”
• explaining that ESA amended to include an ITS that would “specify[] the amount or extent of anticipated take”
• “Appellants have presented no authority mandating that an agency must authorize all stages of a project in one [record of decision].”
• “The court’s role is to ensure that the agency came to a rational conclusion, not to conduct its own investigation and substitute its own judgment for the administrative agency’s decision.” (quotation marks omitted)
• “The court’s role is to ensure that the agency came to a rational conclusion, not to conduct its own investigation and substitute its own judgment for 'the administrative agency’s decision.” (quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).