Court to Obama: Show your cards on mountaintop removal

April 2, 2009 by Ken Ward Jr.

barack-obama-stari_1111370c.jpg

Obama administration officials better figure out pretty soon what their game plan is for dealing with mountaintop removal coal mining … because a federal appeals court today gave them a deadline.

By April 14, Obama’s lawyers from the Department of Justice must respond to a motion for a rehearing of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision overturning a mountaintop removal ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert C. Chambers.

Questions about Obama’s position and his plans for regulating mountaintop removal have been growing since the 4th Circuit’s decision on Feb. 14 — and have reached new levels in the last week, after the U.S. EPA announced plans for much closer reviews of Clean Water Act permits for valley fills.

us_courthouse_4th_circuit.png

The Lewis F. Powell U.S. Courthouse, Richmond, Va.

Over the last eight years, the Richmond, Va.-based 4th Circuit — considered the most conservative appeals court in the country –  has overturned four district court rulings from West Virginia that would have curbed mountaintop removal or at least required much more scrutiny of the process.

In fact, all five federal judges from West Virginia who have weighed in on mountaintop removal have all concluded the law requires much more rigid regulation of the practice. District Judges Charles H. Haden II, Joseph R. Goodwin, and Chambers have ruled that way at the trial court level. In Richmond, Judges M. Blane Michael and Robert B. King have done so.

(For those who don’t recall — most federal appeals court rulings are made by three-judge panels that are alleged selected randomly. After a panel decision, the losing party can ask for a rehearing “en banc.” The French term means “on the bench,” but in this case is refers to a rehearing by the full 4th Circuit, which is now 11 judges and 3 senior status judges).

Anyway, citizen groups lawyers filed a motion on Monday asking the full 4th Circuit to rehear an appeal of Judge Chambers’ March 2007 ruling.  On Feb. 14, a three-judge panel overturned Chambers’ decision, which essentially required more scrutiny by the Corps of Engineers before it issued valley fill permits. That panel ruled on a 2-1 vote, with Judges Roger Gregory, a Clinton appointee, and Dennis Shedd, a George W. Bush appointee, voting in the majority, and Michael, another Clinton appointee, voting to uphold Chambers’ decision.

Under federal appeals court rules, neither the government nor the coal industry would typically be allowed to file a response to this motion for rehearing. The rule actually reads:

Unless the court requests, no answer to a petition for panel rehearing is permitted. But ordinarily rehearing will not be granted in the absence of such a request. 

If the 4th Circuit were to grant a rehearing — and there is certainly no guarantee (far from it) that they will — the court then does one of three things: (a)make a final disposition of the case without reargument; (b) restore the case to the calendar for reargument or resubmission; or (c) issue any other appropriate order.

So far, though, all that has happened is that the 4th Circuit entered this order today, giving the other side (government and coal industry lawyers) until April 14 to respond to the rehearing petition.

For the record, environmental group lawyers sought rehearings in two of the three previous mountaintop removal cases. In neither case did the 4th Circuit ask the government and the industry to respond. Environmental groups lost both rehearing requests.

Stay tuned …

4 Responses to “Court to Obama: Show your cards on mountaintop removal”

  1. Keith Kinder says:

    We speak of regualtions. Who is the only ones regulated domestic mining. The laws are adding a great amount of cost to domestic mining opening the way for foreign coal. China’s coal where a life has no meaning but it ok to buy that coal. If our government allows one ton of that coal we support the lawless mining of the country. Then there is Columbian coal no enviromental laws at all. Mine and move to the next pit. Is this what we want to support. It is exactly what we support if we allow any of this product in the United States.

  2. Ken Ward Jr. says:

    Keith,
    Sounds like former WVU football coach Don Nehlen, who suggested West Virginia should reduce its regulations to those of China so that we should compete.
    I’m not sure a race to the bottom is the path to economic prosperity.
    Ken.

  3. [...] Blogs @ The Charleston Gazette – » Court to Obama: Show your cards on mountaintop removal. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Elected officials respond4th Circuit Court Gives [...]

  4. [...] conduct more detailed environmental reviews before it approves new valley fills.  The 4th Circuit took the unusual step of requiring the government to respond to the hearing motion filed by environmental groups, [...]

Leave a Reply