North Dakota v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that use of a taser was unreasonable because the plaintiff’s behavior did not rise to the level of “active resistance”
• vacating in part and upholding in part EPA’s disapproval of North Dakota’s implementation plan and the replacement federal implementation plan
• vacating in part and upholding in part EPA’s disapproval of North Dakota's implementation plan and the replacement federal implementation plan
• stating the court would uphold an agency decision that is not a \model of clarity\ if the court could nonetheless discern the pathway that was followed
• reaching the same result and crediting the EPA’s assertion that the use of the Petitioners’ model would “rarely if ever demonstrate that emissions reductions at a single source will have an appreciable effect on incremental visibility improvement in a given area”
• “Under the first step of the Chevron analysis, we employ the traditional tools of statutory interpretation to determine whether the statute makes clear the intent of Congress as to the meaning of the phrase,” including by looking to the ordinary meaning of the language used

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).