Court says water rule suits should begin in trial courts
WASHINGTON (AP) - Opponents of an Obama administration rule aimed at protecting small streams and wetlands from development and pollution now know which courts should be hearing their lawsuits.
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that litigation over the rule should begin in the lowest level of federal courts, not in the federal courts of appeal. The rule has never taken effect because of lawsuits and is now under review by President Donald Trump's administration.
The 2015 rule sought to settle a debate over which waterways are covered under the Clean Water Act. The debate has dragged on for years and remained murky despite two Supreme Court rulings.
President Barack Obama's administration redefined "waters of the United States" protected under the act to include smaller creeks and wetlands.
Justices side with police over partygoers in wild bash
By Jessica Gresko
Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court sided Monday with police over partygoers in a dispute about arrests at a 2008 bash at a vacant home that had been turned into a makeshift strip club.
The high court ruled that police had sufficient reason to make arrests at the raucous party, which took place in a District of Columbia duplex furnished only with a few metal chairs and a mattress. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in an opinion that police reasonably concluded that the revelers "were knowingly taking advantage of a vacant house as a venue for their late night party."
"Most homeowners do not live in near-barren houses. And most homeowners do not invite people over to use their living room as a strip club, to have sex in their bedroom, to smoke marijuana inside, and to leave their floors filthy. The officers could thus infer that the partygoers knew their party was not authorized," he wrote.
Police officers arrived after receiving a complaint about loud music and illegal activities at a home that had been vacant for months. Arriving officers found loud music playing. Inside the home, they smelled marijuana and saw beer bottles and cups of liquor on the floor. Scantily clad women were performing lap dances while wearing cash-stuffed garter belts. Upstairs, officers found a naked woman, several men, open condom wrappers and a bare mattress.
The partiers provided police with inconsistent stories about the bash. Many said it was a bachelor party, but no one could identify the bachelor. Partygoers claimed they'd been invited to the home but could not say by whom. Two people said that a woman named "Peaches" was the party's host, but she wasn't there when police arrived. Reached by phone, Peaches eventually told police she had invited people to the house but didn't have the homeowner's approval to use the place.
A total of 21 people were arrested for unlawful entry, though charges were later dropped. Some of the revelers later sued for false arrest, and they were awarded $680,000 plus attorneys' fees.
The Supreme Court disagreed with that result, saying the arrests were proper and reversing a lower-court ruling for the partiers.
The case is District of Columbia v. Wesby, 15-1485.
Appeal of bearded seal listing rejected
By Dan Joling
Associated Press
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) - The U.S. Supreme Court will not review a lower court ruling that confirmed Alaska's bearded seal population as a threatened species.
The court Monday declined to review a conclusion by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the National Marine Fisheries Service had acted properly in listing Arctic Ocean bearded seals as threatened because of projected sea ice loss.
The state of Alaska, the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, the American Petroleum Institute and a handful of Alaska municipalities and development groups appealed. A senior assistant attorney general for Alaska, Cori Mills, called the decision disappointing.
"We still believe that the decision to list the bearded seal based on projections 100 years into the future was not supported by adequate science and contrary to any reasonable interpretation of the Endangered Species Act," Mills said in an email. "We will explore our administrative options to right this wrong for listing a species robust in health and numbers."
The Interior Department listed polar bears as threatened in 2008. The listing of ringed seals, the main prey of polar bears, and bearded seals followed in December 2012. All were tied to projected loss of sea ice in the Arctic.
Bearded seals get their name from short snouts covered with thick, long, white whiskers. They grow as large as 8 feet, weigh up to 800 pounds and can live to 25 years or more. They eat Arctic cod and shrimp but also dive for crab and clams, usually in depths less than 325 feet (100 meters), according to federal managers.
Bearded seals give birth and rear pups on drifting pack ice over shallow water where prey is abundant. Females that give birth need pack ice to last long enough in the spring and early summer to successfully reproduce and molt.
A projected retreat of sea ice from shallow shelves decreases food availability, the listing petition said.
The Center for Biological Diversity filed the petition seeking the bearded seal listing and praised the decision by the Supreme Court. Center attorney Kristen Monsell said Monday the decision follows the law and gives bearded seals protections they need.
The decision was based on the best science available, she said, including climate models that may have been too conservative in projections of less spring and early summer sea ice. More that 70 percent of the population whelps in the Bering Sea, she said.
"Those conditions might exist as early as the next decade," she said.
Published: Wed, Jan 24, 2018
