National Coalition for Marine Conservation v. Evans

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a fishing closure with “incidental allocative effects” was not allocative because it did “not directly distribute fishing privileges, quotas or ocean areas among different groups of fishers”
• upholding fishing closure despite disadvantaging fishermen'' who lived near closed areas because the closure reduced bycatch
• dismissing plaintiffs’ arguments that NMFS failed to analyze alternative conservation measures, explaining that they “ha[d] not specified any record 46 evidence showing that NMFS ignored a less costly, practicable approach . . . , as National Standard Seven prohibits”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).