The Natural Resources Defense Council has filed its brief in the US Supreme Court case about the Navy’s use of mid-frequencyactive (MFA) sonar in training exercises off the California coast, Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., No. 07-1239:
The Navy argues that a letter it procured from another executive-branch agency, the White House Counsel on Environmental Quality (“CEQ”), disagreeing with the district court’s finding, compelled the court to strike the challenged measures. This novel argument, reduced to its essentials, is that an Article III court must set aside its findings of fact and modify an injunction because an administrative agency in which Congress has vested no adjudicatory authority, and which lacks any expertise in the issue in dispute, disagrees with the court’s findings. The consequence of the Navy’s argument—that CEQ was entitled to sit as a “court of errors” in review of the district court’s findings—ignores not just NEPA but bedrock principles of administrative law and constitutional doctrine concerning the separation of powers between the executive and judicial branches.
Brief at 1-2. Download the brief here. Other briefs in the case, including the amicus brief we filed on behalf of nine retired Admirals and several service support groups, are posted here.