Gibbs v. Babbitt case brief
214 F.3d 483 (4th Cir. 2000)
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
214 F.3d 483 (4th Cir. 2000)
CASE SYNOPSIS: Plaintiffs appealed a
judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District
of North Carolina, at Greenville, upholding a Fish and Wildlife
Service regulation as a valid exercise of federal power under the
Commerce Clause.
FACTS: Plaintiffs, private landowners and counties, challenged the constitutionality of a Fish and Wildlife Service regulation that limited the taking of red wolves on private land. The district court upheld the regulation as a valid exercise of federal power under the Commerce Clause. This court affirmed, finding that the regulated activity substantially affected interstate commerce and because the regulation was part of a comprehensive federal program for the protection of endangered species. The court also found that the tourism the red wolves generated substantially affected interstate commerce. Further, the court found that the regulation of red wolf takings was also closely connected to a second interstate market -- scientific research. Finally, the court found that the taking of red wolves was connected to interstate markets for agricultural products and livestock. Judicial deference to the judgment of the democratic branches was therefore appropriate.
CONCLUSION: Judgment affirmed; the protection of the red wolf on both federal and private land substantially affected interstate commerce through tourism, trade, scientific research, and other potential economic activities.
---
FACTS: Plaintiffs, private landowners and counties, challenged the constitutionality of a Fish and Wildlife Service regulation that limited the taking of red wolves on private land. The district court upheld the regulation as a valid exercise of federal power under the Commerce Clause. This court affirmed, finding that the regulated activity substantially affected interstate commerce and because the regulation was part of a comprehensive federal program for the protection of endangered species. The court also found that the tourism the red wolves generated substantially affected interstate commerce. Further, the court found that the regulation of red wolf takings was also closely connected to a second interstate market -- scientific research. Finally, the court found that the taking of red wolves was connected to interstate markets for agricultural products and livestock. Judicial deference to the judgment of the democratic branches was therefore appropriate.
CONCLUSION: Judgment affirmed; the protection of the red wolf on both federal and private land substantially affected interstate commerce through tourism, trade, scientific research, and other potential economic activities.
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment