Citizens for Better Forestry v. Department of Agriculture

Good Law
341 F.3d 961
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 28, 2003No. 02-16009California7,199 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wardlaw, J.

Appellants 1 (hereinafter “Citizens”), a coalition of environmental groups, appeal the district court’s grant of partial summary judgment in favor of the United States Department of Agriculture and the United States Forest Service (collectively the “USDA”). Asserting that the USDA failed to comply with procedural requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act before promulgating its new national forest management policy (the “2000 Plan Development Rule”), Citizens sought in-junctive relief to preclude implementation of the 2000 Plan Development Rule until the USDA complied with the statutory requirements. The district court held it did not have jurisdiction over this action because (i) Citizens failed to demonstrate a reasonable probability that the Rule threatened their concrete interests as their complaint was directed to neither a site-specific project nor a particular forest plan, and thus they lack standing; and (ii) Citizens failed to show any imminent injury and thus their claims are not ripe. Because Citizens alleges procedural injury, however, we hold that Citizens established both standing and ripeness, and reverse and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.