Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
· 6/7/2004

Department of Transportation v. Public Citizen

Citations

  • 541 U.S. 752
  • 124 S. Ct. 2204
  • 159 L. Ed. 2d 60
  • 2004 U.S. LEXIS 4027
  • 34 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20033
  • 72 U.S.L.W. 4445
  • 17 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 353
  • 58 ERC (BNA) 1545
  • 26 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1097

About this case

Jump to content

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2004 United States Supreme Court case

Department of Transportation v. Public Citizen, 541 U.S. 752 (2004), is a Supreme Court of the United States case in which the court held that, because FMCSA lacks discretion to prevent cross-border operations of Mexican motor carriers, neither NEPA nor the CAA requires FMCSA to evaluate the environmental effects of such operations. The case was argued on 21 April 2004. The question the case presented related to presidential foreign affairs and foreign trade actions exempt from environmental-review requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Clean Air Act . Specifically, the question is whether those actions are subject to those requirements as a result of a rulemaking action concerning motor carrier safety by the federal agency with responsibility for that type of safety.

See also

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Department_of_Transportation_v._Public_Citizen&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: See also")
]

Further reading

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Department_of_Transportation_v._Public_Citizen&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: Further reading")
]

  • Logan, Melissa (2004). "EPA & NAFTA: Tensions Rise When Trade with Mexico Threatens United States' Environmental Regulations". Journal of Natural Resources & Environmental Law. 19: 107. ISSN  1070-4833 .
  • MacMillan, Jeannette (2005). "An International Dispute Reveals Weaknesses in Domestic Environmental Law: NAFTA, NEPA, and the Case of Mexican Trucks". Ecology Law Quarterly. 32: 491. ISSN  0046-1121 .
  • Miller, Joseph (2004). "United States Department of Transportation v. Public Citizen" (PDF). Harvard Environmental Law Review. 28 (2): 593–604.

External links

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Department_of_Transportation_v._Public_Citizen&action=edit&section=3 "Edit section: External links")
]

show

United States environmental law

Supreme Court

decisions

Major
federal legislation ,
treaties,
and lower court
decisions

…

Editorial context from Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0).

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that NEPA does not apply to an agency that lacks statutory authority to act in the relevant manner
  • holding that “[b]ecause respondents did not raise these particular objections” they “therefore forfeited any objection . . . on th[at] ground”
  • noting that NEPA does not mandate particular results, but rather establishes procedural requirements with a \focus on improving agency decisionmaking\
  • holding that NEPA does not require the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to evaluate the environmental effects of cross-border motor carrier operations because the agency lacked the discretion to prevent those operations
  • noting that NEPA does not mandate particular results, but rather establishes procedural requirements with a “focus on improving agency decisionmaking”
  • holding that NEPA does not require the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to evaluate the environmental effects of cross-border motor carrier operations because the agency lacked the discretion to prevent those operations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Thomas

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.