INTERNATIONAL IMPLICATIONS: THE ELEPHANT IN THE LIVING ROOM IN "PUBLIC CITIZEN V. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION"

The dispute in Public Citizen v. Department of Transportation lies at the intersection between the United States’s international obligations and domestic environmental law. As the forces of globalization render the interdependence among nations more complex, the number of disputes at this intersecti...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Environmental Law. - Lewis & Clark Law School. - 34(2004), 3, Seite 961-1000
1. Verfasser: Shirey, Katharine G. (VerfasserIn)
Format: Online-Aufsatz
Sprache:English
Veröffentlicht: 2004
Zugriff auf das übergeordnete Werk:Environmental Law
Schlagworte:Law Political science Applied sciences
LEADER 01000caa a22002652 4500
001 JST11298620X
003 DE-627
005 20240625001651.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 180605s2004 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)JST11298620X 
035 |a (JST)43267129 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rakwb 
041 |a eng 
100 1 |a Shirey, Katharine G.  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a INTERNATIONAL IMPLICATIONS: THE ELEPHANT IN THE LIVING ROOM IN "PUBLIC CITIZEN V. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION" 
264 1 |c 2004 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The dispute in Public Citizen v. Department of Transportation lies at the intersection between the United States’s international obligations and domestic environmental law. As the forces of globalization render the interdependence among nations more complex, the number of disputes at this intersection will increase. In Public Citizen, the Ninth Circuit chose to restrict its review to the domestic environmental requirements at issue. This chapter argues that the Ninth Circuit’s failure to put those requirements in the context of the international implications of the case, though permissible under the law, was short sighted. The disagreement in Public Citizen concerns whether or not a federal agency’s environmental assessment must include the environmental consequences of action taken by the President to comply with international law. Without analyzing the international law involved, the Ninth Circuit ruled that it must. Analysis of the international law involved in this case indicates that the environmental impact statement required by the Ninth Circuit is in complete compliance with U.S. international obligations. Furthermore, separation-of-powers analysis indicates that the President’s foreign relations powers cannot be used to counter the express wishes of Congress in relation to the environmental assessment at issue in this case. This chapter argues that, had the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Public Citizen included an analysis of international law, that opinion would have robbed DOT of its argument to the Supreme Court that the Ninth Circuit’s decision impinges on the President's foreign relations powers. Finally, this Chapter concludes that Congress should use its foreign commerce power to expressly address the domestic environmental consequences of international obligations taken on by the United States. 
540 |a Copyright © 2004 Environmental Law 
650 4 |a Law  |x International law 
650 4 |a Political science  |x Civics  |x Citizenship 
650 4 |a Law  |x Administrative law  |x Environmental law  |x Environmental legislation  |x National Environmental Policy Act 
650 4 |a Applied sciences  |x Engineering  |x Transportation  |x Commercial transportation  |x Freight transport  |x Trucking 
650 4 |a Applied sciences  |x Engineering  |x Transportation 
650 4 |a Political science  |x Politics  |x International politics  |x International relations  |x Foreign affairs 
650 4 |a Law  |x International law  |x Treaties 
650 4 |a Political science  |x Government  |x Government officials  |x Heads of state  |x Presidents 
650 4 |a Political science  |x Politics  |x International politics  |x International relations 
650 4 |a Political science  |x Politics  |x International politics  |x International relations  |x International cooperation  |x International agreements  |x 2003 NINTH CIRCUIT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 
655 4 |a research-article 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Environmental Law  |d Lewis & Clark Law School  |g 34(2004), 3, Seite 961-1000  |w (DE-627)320639770  |w (DE-600)2024916-0  |x 00462276  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:34  |g year:2004  |g number:3  |g pages:961-1000 
856 4 0 |u https://www.jstor.org/stable/43267129  |3 Volltext 
912 |a GBV_USEFLAG_A 
912 |a SYSFLAG_A 
912 |a GBV_JST 
912 |a GBV_ILN_11 
912 |a GBV_ILN_20 
912 |a GBV_ILN_22 
912 |a GBV_ILN_24 
912 |a GBV_ILN_31 
912 |a GBV_ILN_39 
912 |a GBV_ILN_40 
912 |a GBV_ILN_60 
912 |a GBV_ILN_62 
912 |a GBV_ILN_63 
912 |a GBV_ILN_65 
912 |a GBV_ILN_70 
912 |a GBV_ILN_100 
912 |a GBV_ILN_101 
912 |a GBV_ILN_110 
912 |a GBV_ILN_120 
912 |a GBV_ILN_184 
912 |a GBV_ILN_285 
912 |a GBV_ILN_374 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2001 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2003 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2005 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2006 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2008 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2009 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2010 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2011 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2014 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2015 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2018 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2020 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2021 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2026 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2027 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2044 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2050 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2056 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2057 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2061 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2107 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2949 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2950 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4012 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4035 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4037 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4046 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4112 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4125 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4126 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4242 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4251 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4305 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4307 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4323 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4324 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4325 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4326 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4335 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4346 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4393 
951 |a AR 
952 |d 34  |j 2004  |e 3  |h 961-1000