The Endangered Species Act provides that all federal agency actions are to be designed so that they do not jeopardize endangered or threatened species. The act had been interpreted to reach federal agency work or funding in foreign countries, but the federal government changed that interpretation in 1986 to limit the act’s reach to the United States and the high seas. A group labeled Defenders of Wildlife filed suit, seeking to reinstate the original interpretation. The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, where Justice Scalia wrote that Defenders of Wildlife would have to submit evidence showing that at least one of its members would be “directly” affected by the interpretation. In response, one member of Defenders of Wildlife wrote that she had visited Egypt and observed the endangered Nile crocodile and hoped to return to do so again but feared that U.S. aid for the Aswan High Dam would harm the crocodiles. Do you think Defenders of Wildlife should have been permitted to sue? Why or why not?
Answer to relevant Questions1. Is Putnam correct about a. Declining social capital in America and b. A growing opportunity gap between affluent and less well-off children? Explain. 2. American Dan Lawton commenting on his first trip to Africa: In ...Economist Robert Crandall: Our best chances for regulatory reform in certain environmental areas, particularly in air pollution policy, come from the states. Probably, responsibility for environmental regulation belongs with ...Ott Chemical Co. polluted the ground at its Michigan plant. CPC International created a wholly owned subsidiary to buy Ott, which was accomplished in 1965. CPC retained the original Ott managers. Pollution continued through ...1. If you were a member of ICANN, who would you vote to give the TLD of .amazon to— Amazon.com or the consortium of Latin American countries through which the Amazon River runs?110 Would you agree to the creation of such ...a. Should online bloggers be entitled to protection as journalists under the First Amendment with regard to the confidentiality of their sources? b. What if those sources have illegally revealed corporate trade secrets?121
Post your question