Nuclear Energy Institute, Inc. v. 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.

• advising that when a court reviews an agency’s evaluation of “scientific data within its technical expertise,” its review should be “extremely deferential”
• “[Requiring a party to participate in further administrative or judicial proceedings is not a hardship sufficient to outweigh a determination that an issue is unfit for review.”
• finding standing where, although one alleged injury might not occur “for thousands of years,” another injury allegedly would occur very soon
• finding standing where, although one alleged injury might not occur “for thousands of years,” another injury would allegedly occur very soon
• “[R]equiring a party to participate in further administrative or judicial proceedings is not a hardship sufficient to outweigh a determination that an issue is unfit for review.”
• standing where member alleged hazardous waste would “contaminate his community’s ground-water supplies”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).