Real Estate & Property Law

Decision in Navy Sonar Case

By Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)

The U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling today in Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., No. 07-1239, the case about the Navy's use of mid-frequency active sonar in training exercises off the California coast. The Court vacated the injunction the California district court imposed:

The preliminary injunction is vacated to the extent challenged by the Navy. The balance of equities and the public interest?which were barely addressed by the District Court?tip strongly in favor of the Navy. The Navy?s need to conduct realistic training with active sonar to respond to the threat posed by enemy submarines plainly outweighs the interests advanced by the plaintiffs.

My Damon Key colleagues Mark Murakami and Christi-Anne Kudo Chock and I filed an amicus brief in the case.  Our brief set forth the arguments of nine retired Admirals, including a former Chief of Naval Operations, former Commanders of the Pacific (Pearl Harbor) and Seventh (Asia-Pacific and Indian Ocean) Fleets, and Commanders of the Pacific Command.  They have also commanded Navy battle groups, aircraft carriers, and surface ships. Also on the brief are the Navy League of the United States (and its Honolulu Council), and several other military support groups from California, Hawaii, and other western states. Chief Justice Roberts captured the essence of the their argument in his questioning at oral argument last month: 

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: I think that's -- I think that's quite right. My question, though, is that at no point that did the district judge undertake a balancing of the equities, putting on the one side the potential for harm to marine mammals that she found -- and that's your point about the record -- and putting on the other side the potential that a North Korean diesel electric submarine will get within range of Pearl Harbor undetected. Now, I think that's a pretty clear balance. And the district court never entered -- never went into that analysis.

Tr. at 48 (emphasis added). Mark has posted a resource page about the Winter case, with links to all of the briefs and selected media coverage on his hawaiioceanlaw blog here.  SCOTUSblog posts analysis here.  More after a chance to digest the opinion and dissents.

Full post as published by inversecondemnation on November 12, 2008 (boomark / email).