Giuseppe Sandro Mela.
2021-03-06.
«Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett on Thursday authored her first ruling since joining the U.S. Supreme Court in October as the court handed a defeat to an environmental group seeking access to government documents»
«In the 7-2 ruling, the justices sided with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, thwarting an effort by the Sierra Club to obtain documents concerning a regulation finalized in 2014 relating to power plants. Barrett and the court’s other five conservative justices were joined by liberal Justice Elena Kagan in the majority, with liberals Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor in dissent»
«The court sided 7-2 against the Sierra Club, which filed a FOIA request for “draft biological opinions” that environmental officials produced in 2013. Those opinions analyzed potential threats to endangered species from a proposed rule on underwater structures used to cool down industrial equipment»
«The court sent the case, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service v. Sierra Club, back to a federal district court for further analysis of whether any parts of the documents can be separated from the privileged material and thus disclosed under FOIA»
* * * * * * *
La sentenza N 19-547, nel rimandare il tutto alla Corte di Appello del Nono Circuito, è corredata da un voluminoso Certiorari, ossia dalle istruzioni giuridiche di come si debbano valutare questo tipo di cause.
Sono una doccia gelida per i giudici del Nono Circuito, sia per i contenuti rimarcati, sia per il fatto che la sentenza è stata presa sette contro due.
Quando i giudici sentenziano sulla base delle loro ideologie, invece che secondo costituzione e diritto, producono delle brutture giuridiche che nulla hanno a che fare con la giustizia.
*
Scotus Blog. In Barrett’s first majority opinion, court sides with government in FOIA dispute
The federal government does not have to fully disclose certain draft environmental documents under the Freedom of Information Act, even if those documents reflect an agency’s final view about a policy proposal that it later abandons, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday. Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the opinion, her first majority opinion since joining the court in October.
The court sided 7-2 against the Sierra Club, which filed a FOIA request for “draft biological opinions” that environmental officials produced in 2013. Those opinions analyzed potential threats to endangered species from a proposed rule on underwater structures used to cool down industrial equipment.
The government argued that the documents were covered by FOIA’s “deliberative process” privilege, which allows the government to withhold documents that are generated as part of an agency’s process of formulating a new policy. Barrett agreed, rejecting the Sierra Club’s argument that the documents embodied a final policy conclusion and therefore should not be covered by the privilege.
Although the documents were the “last word” about the proposed rule, they do not represent final agency decision-making because the Environmental Protection Agency reconsidered the proposed rule and never issued it, Barrett wrote.
The draft opinions, Barrett wrote, “were not last because they were final; they were last because they died on the vine.”
The court sent the case, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service v. Sierra Club, back to a federal district court for further analysis of whether any parts of the documents can be separated from the privileged material and thus disclosed under FOIA.
Justice Stephen Breyer, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, dissented.
*
Barrett authors first U.S. Supreme Court ruling, a loss for environmentalists
Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett on Thursday authored her first ruling since joining the U.S. Supreme Court in October as the court handed a defeat to an environmental group seeking access to government documents.
In the 7-2 ruling, the justices sided with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, thwarting an effort by the Sierra Club to obtain documents concerning a regulation finalized in 2014 relating to power plants. Barrett and the court’s other five conservative justices were joined by liberal Justice Elena Kagan in the majority, with liberals Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor in dissent.
The Senate approved Barrett for a lifetime job on the top U.S. judicial body on Oct. 26 after an accelerated confirmation process that unfolded in the weeks before the Nov. 3 presidential election. She is one of three justices appointed by Republican former President Donald Trump and she replaced liberal Justice Ruther Bader Ginsburg, who died on Sept. 18.
Trump touted his appointment of Barrett in campaign rallies ahead of the election, which he lost to Democratic President Joe Biden. Her swift confirmation by the Senate, which at the time was controlled by Trump’s fellow Republicans but is now led by the Democrats, moved the court further to the right and prevented Biden from replacing Ginsburg with a liberal successor. It marked the closest to a presidential election that a Supreme Court justice had won Senate confirmation.
The Sierra Club ruling limits the scope of U.S. agency documents that would be subject to a federal law called the Freedom of Information Act, which lets people request certain government materials.
The group wanted access to internal documents concerning the Fish and Wildlife Service’s conclusion that a proposed environmental regulation for cooling water intake structures that are used by power plants and other industrial facilities would not adversely affect endangered species, including fish, turtles and shellfish.
In 2013, the agency initially found that the regulation would put the species in jeopardy but its final recommendation to the Environmental Protection Agency in 2014 reached the opposite conclusion.
Writing for the court, Barrett said the 2013 draft documents were protected from disclosure because “they reflect a preliminary view – not a final decision – about the likely effect of the EPA’s proposed rule on endangered species.”
A federal judge in California ruled in 2017 that 11 documents had to be disclosed. Trump’s administration appealed and the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2018 ruled partly for the government but still found that nine documents had to be released.
The case was argued on Nov. 2, the day before Election Day. It marked first Barrett’s arguments as a justice. She previously served on a lower federal appeals court and as a legal scholar at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana.
So far, Barrett’s biggest impact on the court came when she provided the decisive vote in favor of religious entities challenging COVID-19 restrictions in New York.
SenzaNubi 