In re Polar Bear Endangered Species Act Listing and § 4(d) Rule Litigation
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
709 F.3d 1 (2013)
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) (defendant) decided to list polar bears as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (Act), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531 et seq. The Act defined a threatened species as one that was likely to become endangered within the “foreseeable future.” The FWS used the best available climate models to define the foreseeable future as 45 years. The FWS then issued a listing rule that categorized polar bears as threatened, citing three main considerations: (1) the polar bears’ dependence on sea ice for survival, (2) the decline in sea ice, and (3) the continued sea-ice decline due to climate change. These considerations resulted from the FWS’s review of published studies, observations, models, and reports from sources that included the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Although the FWS considered 19 different polar-bear populations, the FWS found that the populations were not sufficiently distinguishable to be divided into distinct segments. A number of industry groups, environmental organizations, and states (plaintiffs) challenged the listing rule as either overly restrictive or insufficiently protective. The plaintiffs’ challenges were consolidated before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs argued that the FWS had misinterpreted and misapplied the record regarding its decisions on the distinct population segments and the 45-year foreseeability period. The district court rejected the plaintiffs’ challenges to the listing rule and granted summary judgment to the FWS. The plaintiffs appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Edwards, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 173,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.