Parker v. McDonough

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that if Congress specifies that judicial review may be had in a particular court, then Congress ordinarily intends that the specified court has exclusive jurisdiction
• finding that a district court may not exercise jurisdiction over FCC actions otherwise exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals merely because a party alleges a violation of the National Environmental Policy Act
• noting that the presumption of reviewability is “codified” in APA Section 702
• observing that “[t]he rationale for statutory review is that coherence and economy are best served if all suits pertaining to designated agency decisions are segregated in particular courts” and raising concerns regarding potential “duplication and inconsistency”
• construing direct review provisions of Communications Act of 1934 to require NEPA challenges to be brought in the court of appeals
• construing direct review provisions of Communications Act of 1934 to require NEPA challenges to be brought in the court of appeals

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).