Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 21 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Barnes v. United States Department of Transportation.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Barnes v. United States Department of Transportation Anchor | green | “nepa imposes procedural requirements designed to force agencies to take a "hard look” | 3 |
| 2 | Edwardsen v. U.S. Dept. of Interior | green | “(1) formulation of a five year leasing plan by the department of the interior; (2) lease sales; (3) exploration by the lessees; and (4) development and production.” | 3 |
| 3 | Edwardsen v. U.S. Dept. of Interior | green | “contains a reasonably thorough discussion” | 3 |
| 4 | Edwardsen v. U.S. Dept. of Interior | green | “we review an environmental impact statement under a rule of reason to determine whether it contains a reasonably thorough discussion” | 3 |
| 5 | United States v. Jonathon Marc Sutter | green | “providing sufficient detail to foster informed decision-making” | 3 |
| 6 | Northern Alaska Environmental Center v. Kempthorne | green | “improperly minimizing negative side effects.” | 3 |
| 7 | Northern Alaska Environmental Center v. Kempthorne | green | “the area has high oil resource potential and there is existing transportation infrastructure to move oil from northern alaska to distant markets.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.