Karnap v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that court could not affirm the grant of a prelimi- nary injunction \in the absence of evidence that the district court engaged in a specific test of the balance of the hardships\ and remanding for consideration of the hardships
• “South Carolina has little inherent right to use capacity located within its borders solely for waste generated within its borders”
• \South Carolina seems unlikely to meet the burden of showing that burying in-state hazardous waste rather than out-of-state waste advances the health and safety of South Carolina citizens.\
• “South Carolina may preserve the capacity by limiting total disposal and treatment within the state without reference to whether instate or out-of-state waste is actually involved”
• “South Carolina seems unlikely to meet the burden of showing that burying in-state hazardous waste rather than out-of-state waste advances the health and safety of South Carolina citizens.”
• “Qjusti-fying discrimination is difficult to say the least”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).