WP: Environmental Group Cites Partisanship in Judiciary (Dem/GOP divide)

[DeepModem Mom]

Environmental Group Cites Partisanship in the Judiciary
Study Shows Divide Between Democratic, GOP Appointees

By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 9, 2004; Page A02


Federal judges appointed by Democratic presidents are several times as likely as Republican appointees to rule in favor of plaintiffs who sue the government claiming violations of environmental law, according to a report issued yesterday by the nonpartisan Environmental Law Institute.

The authors of the study -- which examined 325 judicial rulings between Jan. 21, 2001, and June 30, 2003 -- said the results show the degree to which ideological polarization over the environment has influenced the federal judiciary. The nonprofit institute, which researches environmental law but does not litigate or lobby, focused on cases brought under the National Environmental Policy Act, a 35-year-old law requiring agencies to assess how proposed federal policies and programs affect the environment.

Environmental groups -- and sometimes developers -- often challenge federal actions on the grounds that they violate NEPA, which requires environmental impact statements and public input for proposed projects.

On the district court level, according to the survey, Democratic appointees ruled for environmental plaintiffs a little less than 60 percent of the time, while Republican-appointed judges favored environmentalists 28 percent of the time. GOP-appointed district judges, on the other hand, sided with pro-development forces nearly 60 percent of the time while Democratic appointees ruled for them 14 percent of the time.

The contrast was even starker on the appellate level, where Democratic-majority panels favored environmental plaintiffs 58 percent of the time, but GOP-majority panels sided with these groups in just 10 percent of cases....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18737-2004Oct8.html