Contact TheIPD.US




Regulatory Actions
View Public Comments
Submit Comments

NMFS ITA for Gulf of Mexico
NMFS Acoustic Guidelines
NMFS IHA for Scripps

Science
  Best Available Science on Acoustic Effects on Marine Mammals
  Seismic vs. Sonar
  Physical Effects
 Behavioral Effects
  Models
  Sound Propagation
  Mitigation
 Extrapolation From Terrestrial Mammal Acoustic Effects to Marine Mammals
  Cumulative and Synergistic Effects
 Indirect Effects

  NMFS
 MMS
 MMC
 NAS
  US Navy
 Sperm Whale Seismic Study
 ICES
 Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory Institute
 NRDC
 ACCOBAMS
 The Acoustic Ecology Institute
 ASCOBANS
 Fisheries and Oceans Canada
 Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited

Library
  Statutes
 Regulations
 Relevant NMFS Permits
 Major Studies and Reports

Comment on IPD
  Potential Research Projects
  Research Underway
  Structure of the IPD

CRE Interventions
  Agency Administrative Actions
  Rulemaking
  Litigation



















 

Soundings Archive

Supreme Court rules for Navy in California Sonar Case
On November12, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that California federal courts abused their discretion when they issued an injunction significantly restricting the Navy's use of sonar off the California coast. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion and responded to Justice Ginsburg's minority opinion as follows:

    "The bulk of Justice Ginsburg's dissent is devoted to the merits. For the reasons stated, we find the injunctive relief granted in this case an abuse of discretion, even if plaintiffs are correct on the underlying merits. As to the injunction, the dissent barely mentions the Navy's interests... We find that those interests, and the documented risks to national security, clearly outweigh the harm on the other side of the balance."
More specifically, the Court held that the "District Court abused its discretion by imposing a 2,200-yard shutdown zone and by requiring the Navy to power down its MFA sonar during significant surface ducting conditions. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the preliminary injunction is vacated to the extent it has been challenged by the Navy."

The majority opinion notes the lower court's acknowledgment that "the record contains no evidence that marine mammals have been harmed" by the Navy's sonar exercises.
  • Click here to read Supreme Court's opinion

  •  
    Copyright 2005 The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness.
    All rights reserved.