Bragg v. Robertson
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
248 F.3d 275 (2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1113 (2002)
- Written by Robert Cane, JD
Facts
The director of the West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection (the director) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) (defendants) approved a number of permits for mountaintop-removal coal mining over a period. Mountaintop-removal coal mining caused great disruption to the nearby environment, polluting waterways and negatively affecting wildlife. The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA) provided that either individual states or the federal government, but not both, may regulate surface coal mining. After a state program for regulation was approved by the secretary of the Department of the Interior, that state had exclusive jurisdiction over surface-mining regulation within its state borders unless duly revoked by the secretary. In 1981, the secretary granted West Virginia primacy status, meaning it had the exclusive authority to regulate coal mining in the state. West Virginia enacted its own version of the SMCRA and promulgated standards mirroring the standards from the SMCRA. Patricia Bragg, eight other West Virginia residents, and the West Virginia Highlands Conservancy (the resident group) (plaintiffs) brought an action against the director and the Army Corps. The resident group alleged that the director granted mining permits without making the requisite environmental findings. The district court found that the director’s approval of mountaintop-removal coal mining violated federal and state law, so it issued an injunction against dumping mountain rock near streams. The director appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Niemeyer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 790,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
