In Summers v. Earth Island Institute, where the decision of the ...

[Ebrown]

In Summers v. Earth Island Institute, where the decision of the Forest Service to sell burned timber on 238 acres without preparing an environmental impact statement or formal notice of the sale was challenged as a violation of the Forest Service Decisionmaking and Appeals Reform Act, the Supreme Court held that since the:
 a. Forest Service is exempt from most judicial review, the plaintiffs could only challenge the Forest Service's decisions in certain states
  b. Forest Service is exempt from all judicial review, the plaintiffs could not challenge Forest Service's decisions in court
  c. plaintiffs could not demonstrate standing, they could not challenge the Forest Service's actions in court d. plaintiffs could only demonstrate standing, they could not challenge the Forest Service's actions in court e. plaintiffs could demonstrate standing, they could challenge the Forest Service's actions in court

Question 2

Applied to pollution cases, public nuisance is:
 a. repealed by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act b. a term applied to a polluter who causes damage to the air c. a concept no longer used because of the Clean Air Act
  d. an unreasonable interference with a right held by members of the public in common e. none of the other choices are correct

[ktidd]

Answer to Question 1

c

Answer to Question 2

e

[Ebrown]

Wow, this really help

[bassamabas]

Thanks for the timely response, appreciate it