This document summarizes 5 court cases related to environmental law: 1. Massachusetts v. EPA involved Massachusetts suing the EPA for failing to regulate vehicle emissions in response to rising sea levels damaging the state's coast. 2. Sierra Club v. Morton concerned Disney's plan to build a ski resort in Sequoia National Forest, which the Sierra Club tried to stop. 3. Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill was the first case interpreting the Endangered Species Act, and involved blocking construction of a dam to protect the snail darter fish. 4. Juliana v. United States was a youth lawsuit asserting that government actions caused environmental changes violating their constitutional rights. 5. Lu

2. Norvergence Judgment

3. Case 1: Massachusetts v.
Environmental Protection
Agency

4. Hit by the ever-increasing issue of global warming, the
Coast of Massachusetts has been given a red-signal
and declared in-danger. In an attempt to safeguard and
protect the land on the coast, the state of
Massachusetts has filed a petition with the
Environment Protection Agency. The agenda of the
petition is to regulate vehicular gas emissions and
protect the environment.

5. There are a lot of pieces of evidence and examples
that tell about the existence of greenhouse gases that
result in the escalation of global warming. This has
degraded the quality of water on the coast of
Massachusetts.
The request was denied by the EPA which has led the
State of Massachusetts to sue the agency for not
initiating the Clean AirAct.

6. Case 2: Sierra Club v. Morton

7. In the 1920s, The Mineral King Valley, an
underdeveloped location in the Sequoia National
Forest, started to get multiple bids on the land as it
was purely used for mining purposes.
The bids were being placed as an attempt to convert
the land and use it for recreational development.

8. The renowned Walt Disney Enterprises also placed
a bid, ultimately winning it.
The purpose was to create a massive ski resort
spread over a sprawling 80 acres of land.
Keeping a track of every minute activity, the Sierra
Club filed a petition to stop the exploitation of the
underdeveloped land.

9. Case 3: Tennessee Valley Authority v.
Hill

10. The Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill case took
place in the year 1978. The case was the first
interpretation of the Endangered Species Act (1973)
held by the United States Supreme Court. The basis
of the case was to protect endangered species.
After the snail darter fish was discovered in the Little
Tennessee River, a case was filed against the Tellico
Dam construction violating ESA.

11. The main argument here was that the construction of
the dam would take a toll on the natural habitat of the
region. Since the approval for construction was already
granted, approximately 78 million dollars worth of
investment was already received.
Also, being the critical habitat of the snail darter fish,
the plaintiff argued and filed a suit for the enforcement
of the ESA.

12. Case 4: Juliana v. the United States

13. Juliana v. the United States was a lawsuit filed by
the youth asserting that the government’s affirmative
actions have led to drastic environmental changes.
Because of this, the constitutional rights of the
youngster’s have suffered.

14. The constitutional rights included the right to
freedom, life, liberty, property, etc.
It argued that the country has failed to conserve and
protect natural resources. Youngsters and the
plaintiff filed for a claim against the federal
government stating that the fifth amendment was
infringed.

15. Tracking the most recent developments, the
council that administers the youth plaintiff will now
take further steps and will request that the ninth
circuit to review this decision again.

16. Case 5: Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife

17. The case took place in the year 1992 and
questioned the challenges and issues raised by a
group of the American Wildlife Conservation and
many other organizations that work in support of
environmental protection.
The group challenged the regulations issued with
respect to the U.S. secretaries pertaining to interiors
and commerce.

18. The foundation of the case was the excessive U.S.
funding for numerous development projects in
locations such as Mahaweli, Egypt, Sri Lanka, and
Aswan.
The government claims that the act was only
applicable to projects within the geographical bounds
of the country, not outside.

19. Norvergence Judgment: Under Article III of the
constitution, it was found that the respondents lacked
potential to argue.
There was no critical evidence to support the facts and
the issues that were raised. Since there was not enough
evidence to state the redressability and causation of
respondents’ suffering, the petitioner’s activity for
judgment should have been approved.

20. Norvergence