North Carolina Wildlife Federation v. North Carolina Department of Transportation

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “agencies have discretion to identify the range of reasonable alternatives”
• not reaching the question of “whether [the] NEPA permit[ted] the [a]gencies to use [ ] [the] data”
• “Without accurate baseline data, an agency cannot carefully consider information about significant environment impacts[,] resulting in an arbitrary and capricious decision.” (original alterations and citation omitted)
• The court “must ensure that the agency has examined the relevant data and articulated a satisfactory explanation for its action, and must not reduce itself to a rubber-stamp of agency action.”
• “[A]n agency’s action must be upheld, if at all, on the basis articulated by the agency itself,” and the “‘basis articulated by the agency’ is the administrative record, not subsequent litigation rationalizations.” (quoting State Farm, 463 U.S. at 50)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).