REPRESENTATIVE CASES

Our firm litigates diverse public interest cases for a variety of clients centered around the protection of public lands, wildlife and habitat, rivers and wetlands, oceans, environmental justice, historic and cultural resources, animals in captivity, public health, and open government. Below is a representative list of our litigation victories and other important cases handled at various levels of the federal court system as lead counsel or co-lead counsel (in reverse chronological order), along with links to court filings where appropriate.

United States Supreme Court

  • Brief of Colorado Communities as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents, Seven Cnty. Infrastructure Coal. v. Eagle Cnty., Colo. (2024) (No. 23-975) (offering the unique perspective of Colorado communities that will foreseeably be affected by a federal decision that will send trains of flammable crude oil through Colorado, and arguing in favor of preserving the lower court’s well-reasoned decision under NEPA)

  • Brief of Dr. Deni J. Seymour et al. as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners, Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Wolf, 141 S. Ct. 158 (2020) (No. 19-975), 2020 WL 1433258 (supporting the need for Supreme Court review of the Secretary of Homeland Security’s unfettered discretion to waive environmental and historic preservation laws the Secretary deems necessary to construct a border wall)

  • Amicus Curiae Brief of Pamela Underhill et al. in Support of Respondents, U.S. Forest Serv. v. Cowpasture River Pres. Ass’n, 140 S. Ct. 1837 (2020) (No. 18-1584), 2020 WL 402605 (urging the Supreme Court to prohibit pipeline rights-of-way through federal lands in the National Park System consistent with congressional intent in three federal laws)

  • Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, Ark Initiative v. Tidwell, 137 S. Ct. 301 (2016) (No. 16-165), 2016 WL 4151629 (seeking certiorari for Supreme Court review of the Forest Service’s dramatic shift in how it classifies roadless areas in national forests)

  • Brief for Amici Curiae Defs. of Wildlife et al. in Support of Respondents, Am. Elec. Power v. Connecticut, 564 U.S. 410 (2011) (No. 10-174), 2011 WL 1042202 (focusing on the threshold issue of standing in environmental cases, and in particular how the doctrine of standing applies in cases involving common law causes of action)

  • Brief for Amici Curiae Defs. of Wildlife et al. in Support of Respondents, Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms, 561 U.S. 139 (2010) (No. 09-475), 2010 WL 1393444 (highlighting presumptive remedial principles under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) and arguing that a district court has various remedies available under National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), including vacatur and injunctive relief, which do not require an evidentiary hearing)

  • Brief for Amici Curiae Defs. of Wildlife et al. in Support of Respondents, Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, 555 U.S. 7 (2008) (No. 07-1239), 2008 WL 4642202 (explaining NEPA’s unique purpose and statutory scheme and arguing that NEPA’s structure allows for injunctive relief to remedy NEPA violations absent unusual circumstances)

Federal Appellate Courts

  • Brief of Amici Curiae City of Glenwood Springs, Town of Minturn, Town of Avon, Town of Red Cliff, Town of Vail, Routt County, Boulder County, Chaffee County, Lake County, and Pitkin County, Eagle Cnty., Colo. v. Surface Transp. Bd., Nos. 22-1019 & 22-1020 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 29, 2022) (advocating for examination under NEPA of increased rail traffic through Colorado by trains holding waxy crude oil from the Uinta Basin, which will result in derailments, wildfires, interstate closures, environmental damage, and socioeconomic harms)

  • Save The Colorado v. Spellmon, 50 F.4th 954 (10th Cir. 2022) (securing major victory clarifying that litigants may pursue challenges to Clean Water Act Section 404 permits in federal district court, even where permit applicants must also separately obtain a license from FERC under the Federal Power Act that can only be challenged in federal courts of appeal)

  • Amicus Curiae Brief for Animal Welfare Inst. & Farm Sanctuary, N.Y. Legal Assistance Grp. v. Bd. of Immigration Appeals, 987 F.3d 207 (2d Cir. 2021) (No. 19-3248), 2020 WL 418542 (advancing arguments adopted by the Second Circuit in ruling that the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) authorizes courts to compel federal agencies to make information publicly available in online reading rooms)

  • Nat’l Parks Conservation Ass’n v. Semonite, 916 F.3d 1075 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (setting precedent on an issue of first impression in the D.C. Circuit concerning what constitutes a “controversial” action requiring preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement under NEPA)

  • People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. U.S Dep’t of Agric., 918 F.3d 151 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (reversing district court’s dismissal of FOIA case concerning the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s removal of online records pertaining to animal welfare laws)

  • Brief of Amici Curiae Nat'l Parks Conservation Ass'n & Coal. to Prot. Am.'s Nat'l Parks, Sierra Club v. Nat'l Park Serv., No. 18-2095 (4th Cir. Dec. 14, 2018) (representing national park experts and former agency officials in criticizing the National Park Service’s failure to comply with NEPA and the Park Service Organic Act in authorizing a right-of-way for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline)

  • Am. Wild Horse Campaign v. Perdue, 873 F.3d 914 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (overturning the U.S. Forest Service’s boundary change that sought to exclude wild horse use from a portion of the Modoc National Forest in violation of NEPA and the APA)

  • Nev. Ass’n of Cntys. v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 686 F. Appx. 407 (9th Cir. 2017) (representing intervenors and successfully resisting attempt to compel the Bureau of Land Management to permanently remove wild horses from federal public lands in Nevada under the APA)

  • Pub. Emps. for Env’t Responsibility v. Hopper, 827 F.3d 1077 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (prevailing in a challenge to the nation’s first offshore wind energy project authorized by the Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management for violating the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) and APA with respect to federally protected whales and birds)

  • Amici Curiae Brief by Coal. of Conservation Orgs. in Support of Petitioners’ Rehearing Petition, Dine Citizens Against Ruining Our Env’t v. Jewell, 839 F.3d 1276 (10th Cir. 2016) (No. 15-2130) (examining the circuit split in applying the preliminary injunction factors and arguing for the Tenth Circuit’s continued application of the serious questions test)

  • Wyoming v. U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, 839 F.3d 938 (10th Cir. 2016) (representing intervenors in defeating an action by the State of Wyoming seeking to compel the Bureau of Land Management to permanently remove federally protected wildlife from public lands in Wyoming)

  • Am. Wild Horse Pres. Campaign v. Jewell, 847 F.3d 1174 (10th Cir. 2016) (securing precedent on an issue of first impression ruling that agencies may not treat public lands as private in managing wildlife and other natural resources)

Federal Trial Courts

  • S. Utah Wilderness All. v. Nat’l Park Serv., No. 1:23-cv-693 (D.D.C. Apr. 10, 2024) (serving as local counsel and assisting to obtain commitment from NPS to undertake a new rulemaking in connection with off-road vehicle use in Glen Canyon National Recreation Area)

  • Nat’l Wildlife Fed’n v. Lohr, No. 1:19-cv-2416, 2024 WL 727695 (D.D.C. Feb. 22, 2024) (defeating change in policy by the Natural Resources Conservation Service in its treatment of certified wetland determinations that resulted in many wetlands being permanently filled or destroyed to facilitate agricultural production)

  • Friends of the Earth v. Council on Envt'l Quality, No. 1:22-cv-1128 (D.D.C. Nov. 30, 2023) (compelling the disclosure of White House and CEQ records under FOIA regarding CEQ's input on the Interior Department's oil and gas leasing program)

  • Albany Cnty. Conservancy v. Bureau of Land Mgmt., No. 2:23-cv-134 (D. Wyo. Nov. 3, 2023) (obtaining voluntary remand by BLM to conduct more rigorous NEPA review subject to public comment for a transmission line located on BLM land intended to serve an energy project on private land)

  • SeeThink Films v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, No. 1:22-cv-232 (D.D.C. Apr. 19, 2023) (forcing the FBI to disclose decades-old records under FOIA that surveilled the leaders of a pschyotherapy cult called the Sullivan Institute for Research in Psychoanalysis)

  • Monroe Cnty. Bd. of Comm’rs v. U.S. Forest Serv., No. 4:23-cv-00012, 2023 WL 2683125 (S.D. Ind. Mar. 29, 2023) (enjoining widespread burning and logging of the Hoosier National Forest)

  • Friends of the Earth v. U.S. Dep’t of State, No. 1:22-cv-1518 (D.D.C. Mar. 15, 2023) (compelling the State Department to process records under FOIA on an expedited basis in connection with fossil fuel lobbyists shaping White House energy policy in international decisionmaking during the Russo-Ukranian war)

  • Am. Wild Horse Campaign v. Dep’t of Interior, No. 1:20-cv-723 (D.D.C. Mar. 10, 2023) (obtaining thousands of pages of agency records responsive to multiple FOIA requests regarding wild horse management)

  • Save The Colorado v. Spellmon, No. 18-cv-3258, 2023 WL 2402923 (D. Colo. Mar. 7, 2023) (forcing the federal government to provide a privilege log in an APA case to ensure a complete administrative record)

  • Friends of the Earth v. Dep’t of the Interior, No. 1:17-cv-2505 (D.D.C. Mar. 1, 2023) (compelling disclosure of records regarding potential ethics violations by political appointees during the Trump Administration)

  • S. Utah Wilderness All. v. Bernhardt, No. 1:20-cv-3654 (D.D.C. Dec. 12, 2022) (serving as local counsel and assisting to obtain stipulated settlement requiring BLM to undertake supplemental NEPA analysis of proposed helium operation on public lands in Utah)

  • Friends of the Earth v. U.S. Dep't of Treasury, No. 1:20-cv-2031 (D.D.C. Sept. 12, 2022) (forcing the Treasury Department to supply previously withheld records related to lobbying efforts by the fossil fuel industry regarding the agency's implementation of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act)

  • Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Feldhausen, No. 21-cv-409 (D. Ariz. Aug. 9, 2022) (reaching a settlement in an ESA challenge that requires Bureau of Land Management to implement significant conservation measures to protect imperiled species from trespass cattle in the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area)

  • Monroe Cnty. Bd. of Comm’rs v. U.S. Forest Serv., No. 4:20-cv-00106, 595 F. Supp. 3d 713 (S.D. Ind. 2022) (invalidating U.S. Forest Service project to log and burn thousands of acres of the Hoosier National Forest due to failure to take a hard look at environmental impacts under NEPA)

  • Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Christiansen, No. 4:20-cv-251 (D. Ariz. Dec. 28, 2021) (forcing favorable settlement requiring reinitiation of ESA consultation to consider the impact of residential homes, a summer camp, and wildfires on the highly imperiled Mount Graham red squirrel and its critical habitat)

  • Animal Welfare Inst. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., No. 6:18-cv-06626 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 22, 2021) (reaching settlement under FOIA requiring the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food Safety and Inspection Service to proactively disclose documents regarding enforcement of the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act)

  • W. Watersheds Proj. v. Christiansen, No. 20-cv-0067, 2021 WL 5711793 (D. Wyo. Sept. 21, 2021) (obtaining judgment against the Forest Service’s decision to continue the artificial feeding of elk in the Bridger-Teton National Forest in violation of NEPA and the APA)                                       

  • Friends of the Earth v. Nat’l Oceanic & Atmospheric Admin., No. 1:19-cv-01651 (D.D.C. Apr. 28, 2021) (negotiating the disclosure of records concerning Sea Grant’s funding of proposals to study and develop finfish aquaculture that were wrongfully withheld under FOIA)

  • Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Christiansen, No. 1:20-cv-863 (D.N.M. Mar. 29, 2021) (compelling reinitiation of ESA consultation to consider the impact of livestock grazing in the Lincoln National Forest on the highly endangered New Mexico meadow jumping mouse and its critical habitat)

  • Beaver Cnty. v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, No. 2:17-cv-00088 (D. Utah Jan. 6, 2021) (negotiating settlement to protect wild horses from unreasonably rapid removal from public lands in lieu of more effective population growth management strategies)

  • People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., No. 1:18-01886 (D.D.C. Oct. 15, 2020) (forcing the release of information regarding the government’s implementation of the Animal Welfare Act)

  • Or.-Cal. Trails Ass’n v. Walsh, 467 F. Supp. 3d 1007 (D. Colo. 2020) (vacating the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s incidental take permit for a high-voltage transmission line due to deficient analysis of impacts to wildlife, historic, and natural resources under the ESA, NEPA, and the National Historic Preservation Act)

  • Friends of the Earth v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, No. 1:18-cv-01924 (D.D.C. Oct. 9, 2020) (forcing the disclosure of information regarding the Department of Interior’s compliance with agency ethics regulations)

  • People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., Nos. 1:17-cv-00269 & 1:18-cv-00887 (D.D.C. Aug. 17, 2020) (negotiating the ongoing release of information on the agency’s website regarding implementation of Animal Welfare Act consistent with its prior policy and practice)

  • Oak Ridge Env’t Peace All. v. Perry, 412 F. Supp. 3d 786 (E.D. Tenn. 2019) (compelling closer scrutiny under NEPA of seismic risks at a nuclear weapons facility located within the Oak Ridge National Laboratory)

  • Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Bernhardt, No. 3:18-cv-359 (D. Or. July 5, 2019) (granting Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment under the ESA and APA remanding to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service its prior refusal to list the Streaked horned lark as endangered or threatened)

  • Am. Wild Horse Campaign v. Zinke, No. 17-cv-0170 (D. Wyo. Jan. 9, 2019) (succeeding in challenge to the Bureau of Land Management’s new approach to counting wild horses which was methodologically flawed and inadequately explained)

  • Front Range Nesting Bald Eagle Studies v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 353 F. Supp. 3d 1115 (D. Colo. 2018) (overturning the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act permit for a large construction project proximate to an active bald eagle nest)

  • W. Watersheds Proj. v. Christiansen, 348 F. Supp. 3d 1204 (D. Wyo. 2018) (invalidating the Forest Service’s approval of an elk feeding program in the Bridger-Teton National Forest that facilitated the spread of lethal diseases in the Jackson elk herd)

  • Kathrens v. Zinke, No. 3:18-cv-1691 (D. Or. Nov. 13, 2018) (defeating the Bureau of Land Management’s wild horse sterilization experiments that failed to comply with the First Amendment, NEPA, and the APA)

  • Kathrens v. Zinke, 323 F. Supp. 3d 1142 (D. Mont. 2018) (enjoining the Bureau of Land Management from removing wild horses from public lands without first analyzing impacts to the herd’s genetic diversity or the need for a new evaluation of an appropriate population level in light of range resource availability)

  • Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Vilsack, 276 F. Supp. 3d 1015 (D. Nev. 2017) (setting precedent applying Section 7(a)(1) of the ESA to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s insect biocontrol program that led to catastrophic destruction of habitat for the endangered Southwestern willow flycatcher)

  • Am. Wild Horse Pres. Campaign v. Zinke, No. 1:16-cv-00001, 2017 WL 4349012 (D. Idaho Sept. 29, 2017) (vacating the Bureau of Land Management’s Jarbidge Resource Management Plan and the agency’s decision to sterilize an entire wild horse herd in Idaho)       

  • Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Jewell, 248 F. Supp. 3d 946 (D. Ariz. 2017) (rescinding the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s interpretation of “significant portion of its range” in the ESA and the agency’s decision not to list the pygmy owl in reliance on this flawed interpretation)

  • WildEarth Guardians v. Ashe, No. 15-cv-00019, 2016 WL 3919464 (D. Ariz. May 16, 2016) (defeating the government’s motion to dismiss a case challenging the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s regulation removing certain protections for an experimental population of Mexican gray wolves)

  • Shearwater v. Ashe, No. 14-cv-02830, 2015 WL 4747881 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 2015) (invalidating a nationwide regulation promulgated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that sought to exclude public input and NEPA review in issuing permits to kill or disturb bald and golden eagles)

  • High Country Conservation Advocs. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 67 F. Supp. 3d 1262 (D. Colo. 2014) (vacating agency mining approvals and lease modifications, as well as an unlawful portion of the Colorado Roadless Rule, and permanently enjoining all actions under the vacated approvals)

  • Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Jewell, No. 2:13-cv-364, 2014 WL 12617468 (M.D. Fla. May 28, 2014) (reversing the National Park Service’s failure to conduct environmental review under NEPA and the ESA before opening off-road vehicle trails in Big Cypress National Preserve)

  • High Country Conservation Advocs. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 52 F. Supp. 3d 1174 (D. Colo. 2014) (vacating the Forest Service's mining exploration plan and temporarily enjoining ground-disturbing activities that would impact an inventoried roadless area on public lands)

  • Am. Wild Horse Pres. Campaign v. Salazar, 859 F. Supp. 2d 33 (D.D.C. 2012) (requiring the Bureau of Land Management to consider and address scientific expert concerns with the castration of wild free-roaming horses)

  • Defs. of Wildlife v. Salazar, 877 F. Supp. 2d 1271 (M.D. Fla. 2012) (forcing the National Park Service to conduct environmental review under NEPA, the ESA, and the Park Service Organic Act before opening off-road vehicle trails in sensitive areas of Big Cypress National Preserve)

  • Am. Wild Horse Pres. Campaign v. Salazar, 800 F. Supp. 2d 270 (D.D.C. 2011) (defeating the Bureau of Land Management’s decision to castrate a large number of wild free-roaming horses without analyzing the significant impacts of this precedential action)

  • Animal Welfare Inst. v. BP Am., Inc., No. 10-1866 (E.D. La. Aug. 3, 2010) (requiring BP and the Coast Guard to significantly alter their in-situ burn practices in the Gulf of Mexico after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill to avoid killing endangered sea turtles)

  • Showing Animals Respect & Kindness v. Dep’t of the Interior, 730 F. Supp. 2d 180 (D.D.C. 2010) (ruling that the Interior Department must disclose previously withheld records under FOIA concerning the killing of a black bear by a celebrity and his subsequent prosecution)

  • Sierra Club v. Dep’t of Agric., No. 3:08-cv-04248 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 30, 2010) (forcing the U.S. Department of Agriculture to disclose previously withheld records under FOIA concerning federal funding for coal-fired power plants)

  • Animal Welfare Inst. v. Beech Ridge Energy, LLC, 675 F. Supp. 2d 540 (D. Md. 2009) (obtaining precedent on an issue of first impression concerning the application Section 9 of the ESA to a wind energy project that would foreseeably kill endangered Indiana bats)

  • Friends of Animals v. Salazar, 626 F. Supp. 2d 102 (D.D.C. 2009) (invalidating nationwide ESA regulation issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that allowed the killing of captive-bred endangered African antelopes)

  • Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Salazar, No. 3:08-cv-4595 (N.D. Cal. May 5, 2009) (negotiating settlement under the ESA that required the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to issue a new proposed rule designating critical habitat for the California tiger salamander’s Sonoma County subpopulation)