U.S. high court revives timber company's fight over frog habitat
Source: Reuters
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday handed a victory to timber company Weyerhaeuser Co in its bid to limit the federal governments power to designate private land as protected habitat for endangered species in a property rights case involving a warty amphibian called the dusky gopher frog.
The court, in a 8-0 decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, threw out a 2016 ruling by the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that had favored the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and sent the case back to the lower court to reconsider.
In 2012, the Fish and Wildlife Service decided to include private land where the frog does not currently live as critical habitat, potentially putting restrictions on future development opportunities. Weyerhaeuser harvests timber on the Louisiana land in question and was backed in the case by fellow landowners and business groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The frog, found only in southern Mississippi, also previously inhabited Louisiana and Alabama. The U.S. government identified the Louisiana land partly owned by Weyerhaeuser, which is based in Washington state, as meeting the criteria for the frogs habitat under the federal Endangered Species Act.
-snip-
SUPREME COURT NOVEMBER 27, 2018 / 10:35 AM / UPDATED 9 MINUTES AGO
Lawrence Hurley
2 MIN READ
Read more: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-frog/u-s-high-court-revives-timber-companys-fight-over-frog-habitat-idUSKCN1NW1P3
trc
(823 posts)The government essentially "taking" private land into protection and denying the owner the right to use the property as the owner sees fit, because it may potentially, eventually (but is not now) be a habitat for this animal is a dangerous overreach.
...when you see a unanimous decision from the Supreme Court you can pretty much bank on it being the right decision. (Kavanaugh didn't get to vote on it cause he wasn't on the court when arguments were presented.)
scarytomcat
(1,706 posts)in this case frog
Roberts has never ruled for person only the corporation