U.S. Code » Title 16 » Chapter CHAPTER 1— NATIONAL PARKS, MILITARY PARKS, MONUMENTS, AND SEASHORES › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER LIV— EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK

16 U.S.C. § 410b

Administration, protection, and development

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 16 CasesGoogle Scholar

The administration, protection, and development of the aforesaid park shall be exercised under the direction of the Secretary of the Interior by the National Park Service, subject to the provisions of the Act of August 25, 1916 (39 Stat. 535), entitled “An Act to establish a National Park Service, and for other purposes”,11 See References in Text note below. as amended: Provided, That the provisions of the Federal Power Act [16 U.S.C. 791a et seq.] shall not apply to this park: Provided further, That nothing in sections 410 to 410c of this title shall be construed to lessen any existing rights of the Seminole Indians which are not in conflict with the purposes for which the Everglades National Park is created.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1984–2010 · leading case: Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida v. United States, 980 F. Supp. 448 (S.D. Fla. 1997).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida v. United States, 980 F. Supp. 448 (S.D. Fla. 1997). · cites it 4× “' 16 U.S.C. § 410b. The Everglades National Park Act requires that “the area .”
Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 619 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir. 2010). “” 16 U.S.C. § 410b. 10 . This final version of the LRR/EA is available at http://www.”
Organized Fishermen of Florida v. Watt, 590 F. Supp. 805 (S.D. Fla. 1984). “16 U.S.C. § 410b. Congress further provided that the area be administered as a wilderness, and that the unique flora and fauna and essential primitive natural conditions then prevailing in the area be preserved intact.”
Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida v. United States, 619 F.3d 1286 (11th Cir. 2010). “The Tribe claims its substantive due process rights were violated because the construction of the bridge would impinge on its right to use the Everglades under 16 U.S.C. § 410b. II.Standard of Review This Court reviews a district court’s dismissal for lack of subject matter…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.