Bohmker v. Oregon
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
903 F.3d 1029 (2018)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
The State of Oregon (defendant) enacted Senate Bill 3, a statute prohibiting the use of motorized mining equipment in rivers and streams designated as essential salmon habitat, with the express purpose of protecting essential salmon habitat. The statute, which was enacted outside of Oregon’s procedural regime for land-use-planning laws, applied state-wide, including waters located on federal lands. Joshua Caleb Bohmker and a group of other individuals with mining claims on federal lands located in Oregon (the miners) (plaintiffs) challenged the statute, arguing that, although it was couched as an environmental law, the statue was actually a land-use-planning law that applied to federal lands and was therefore preempted by federal law. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and the district court granted Oregon’s motion. The miners appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fisher, J.)
Dissent (Smith, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
