Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone v. United States Department of Interior

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, in challenge to cumulative impacts analysis, plaintiffs “must show . . . the potential for cumulative impact”
• holding that the “BLM, in some cases, may adapt its assessment of environmental impacts when the specific locations of an exploration project’s activities cannot reasonably be ascertained until some time after the project is approved”
• finding no consultation violation where BLM provided the tribe with a sufficient opportunity to identify its concerns about historic properties
• describing the NHPA as a “procedural statute requiring government agencies to ‘stop, look, and listen’ before proceeding with agency action”
• stating an agency “may adapt its assessment of environmental impacts when the specific locations of [a project] cannot reasonably be ascertained until some time after the project is approved”
• describing EA that “devotes a scant three sentences to the cumulative impacts to Water Resources” and makes unsupported statements that any cumulative impacts will be mitigated, holding that “[t]his type of conclusory ‘analysis’” violates NEPA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).