This will be the toad case; according to an article in today¹s Des Moines
Register (starting on page 1, yet!).  A California land developer appealed
to the D.C. Circuit of the U.S Court of Appeals an order by the US Fish and
Wildlife Service to remove a fence from a property to allow the movement of
a group of rare toads.  The appeal was denied, based on the federal
government¹s right to regulate the developer because he was involved in
interstate commerce.  Robert¹s ³polite and humorous² dissent was that the it
was the toads that were being regulated, not the developer, and the toads
were not involved in interstate commerce.

The Alliance for Justice is quoted as being concerned because so many
federal regulations derive their power from the commerce clause and they are
afraid that Roberts¹s narrow views might threaten to undermine many federal
protections, including environmental.

Jo Hudson

On 7/20/05 4:12 PM, "Cindy Hildebrand" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Below is part of a message from a friend that did NOT make my day.  She is not
> certain of what she heard, but I thought I'd better post it anyway, so others
> can confirm or modify.
> 
> Cindy
> 
> ***
> It sounds like our new Supreme Court nominee has expressed a minority opinion
> in regards to endangered species...that he didn't think it was constitutional
> in the case where he ruled...was listening to NPR this morning - can't
> remember the exact time or program, and was only half listening till the e
> word came up, had to be mid morning, since I was home around 11:00 I think. 
> The interviewer asked for an example of a case where this guys opinion was
> clear - since he has not ruled on all that many things they can examine (has
> argued before the SC several times - 39 seems like a lot but that was a number
> I remember) and the example given was described that way.  They were not
> discussing this in terms of environment, but in terms of a case where he has
> broken away from the pack, and that most courts find the Endangered Species
> Act constitutional and he says there are some examples where he believes it is
> not when it comes to individual species on private land that does not affect
> interstate commerce or such - that congress rules only on matters of
> interstate issues and that they should sit on their hands when it comes to all
> else....
> 
> ***
> 
> Cindy Hildebrand
> [log in to unmask]
> Ames, IA  50010
> 
> "Observed an Eclips of the Moon. I had no other glass to assist me in this
> observation but a small refracting telescope belonging to my sextant,
> which...enabled me to define the edge of the moon's immage with much more
> precision that I could have done with the natural eye."  (Meriwether Lewis)
> 
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sign up to
> receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship e-newsletter. Sent out twice a
> month, it features the Club's latest news and activities. Subscribe and view
> recent editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To get off the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]