Humane Society of the United States v. Donald P. Hodel, Secretary of Interior

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the germaneness prong mandates “mere pertinence between litigation subject and organizational purpose” and noting that several courts have declared this prong “undemanding”
• concluding that an association's \members' aesthetic interest in viewing live animals and birds\ was sufficiently germane to a lawsuit whose purpose was \keeping animals and birds alive and well\
• concluding that an association’s “members’ aesthetic interest in viewing live animals and birds” was sufficiently germane to a lawsuit whose purpose was “keeping animals and birds alive and well”
• concluding that, “[f]or similar reasons [that the court found Article III standing], the interests of [the association’s] members also fall within the zone of interests protected by the Endangered Species Act”
• concluding that the Service’s 19 page EA evaluating four alternative refuge hunting plans, possible species endangerment, community and refuge benefits, disturbances to the wildlife, and the potential impact of hunting given the refuge’s size satisfied the “hard look” inquiry
• finding that in authorizing hunting at a wildlife refuge, the Service identified the relevant areas of environmental concern by focusing on endangered species and the repercussions of hunting

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).