Mineral Policy Center v. Norton

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a claimant’s “use of the land may be circumscribed ... because it is not explicitly protected by the Mining Law”
• “noting that ‘confusion in this Circuit remains’ regarding the application of the Flores test to facial challenges to agency regulations, and analyzing the challenge in that case under Chevron”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).