Case law

United States v. Al-Imam

373 F. Supp. 3d 247 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 14, 2019

Charter to the 'prosecute or extradite' regime they establish[.]"). … itself is established."

Murphy v. Internal Revenue Service

460 F.3d 79 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 22, 2006

As an agency of the Government, of course, the IRS shares in that immunity. See Settles v. U.S. … No. 65-767, at 9-10 (1918), the Government observes that the “report simply does not establish that Congress believed taxing compensatory personal injury damages would be unconstitutional.”

Shurberg Broadcasting of Hartford, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Astroline Communications Co., Intervenor

876 F.2d 902 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 16, 1989

[T]he Agency Plan requires women to compete with all other qualified applicants. … Chief Justice Burger, speaking in a minority preference case, remarked: A congressional program choice or finding does not “render it (the program) immune from judicial scrutiny." . TAN 5. .

Roger Severino v. Joseph Biden, Jr.

71 F.4th 1038 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 27, 2023

Cir. 2002) (“Congress is presumed to be aware of established practices and authoritative interpretations of the coordinate branches.”). … Its purpose clearly is not to grant an unconditional term of office.”).

Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc. v. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc. v. Hillary Rodham Clinton

997 F.2d 898 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 22, 1993

Administrator of General Services, 433 U.S. 425, 443 , 97 S.Ct. 2777, 2790 , 53 L.Ed.2d 867 (1977)), even though the counsel was largely immune from the executive branch's operational control (she was appointed by a panel … The government argues that section 202 clearly implies that a temporary employee can be "full-time."

Katherine Anne Meyer v. George Bush, Chairman, Task Force on Regulatory Relief

981 F.2d 1288 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 8, 1993

by an executive order is a sufficient “establishment” to qualify as an agency, provided it passes Sonde’s “sole function” test. 8 The major *1303 ity is surely correct that the President “does not create an ‘establishment … To the contrary, the Task Force’s functions beyond advising and assisting the President equaled or exceeded those of the CEQ, and clearly sufficed to distinguish it from the CEA and to qualify it as an agency.

William R. Gaskins v. United States

410 F.2d 987 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 20, 1967

This rather clearly implied that coupled with “something more” addiction might amount to insanity. … At the very least, we must appraise the situation as clearly unexceptional and the probability of prejudice as quite doubtful.

Hall & Associates v. EPA

956 F.3d 621 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 21, 2020

But it reaffirmed its view that all nine withheld records qualified for the deliberative process privilege. … The complaint asserts that the records were ineligible for withholding under the deliberative process privilege because they were not predecisional: The EPA had “clearly rendered a final decision regarding the national applicability

International Longshoremen's Association, Afl-Cio v. National Mediation Board

870 F.2d 733 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 24, 1989

The South Carolina Ports Authority owned and operated terminal railroads, and in an initial decision in 1969, the Board found that it qualified as a carrier. … NMB is entitled to deference on whichever reasonable interpretation of the statute it clearly enunciates and applies.

Farrell v. Tillerson

315 F. Supp. 3d 47 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 16, 2018

Compl. ¶ 5, which is a harm that this Circuit has recognized as sufficient to establish an injury in fact, see Schnitzler v. United States , 761 F.3d 33 , 40 (D.C. … Mem. at 6, do not qualify as such rules, see Christensen v.

Bean LLC v. John Doe Bank

291 F. Supp. 3d 34 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 4, 2018

While Fusion is correct that "Congress' investigatory power is not, itself, absolute" and that it "is not immune from judicial review," Pl.' … Plaintiff accordingly has not met its burden of establishing irreparable harm.

Connecticut Valley Electric Co. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

208 F.3d 1037 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 14, 2000

In order to secure these benefits to qualifying cogeneration and small power production facilities--so-called Qualifying Facilities, or QFs--the Commission has promulgated the following regulations, respectively: 18 C.F.R … Connecticut Valley then asked the NHPUC to investigate whether Claremont qualified as a QF in view of its having sold its gross output.

Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Federal Communications Commission

100 F.3d 1004 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 26, 1996

Thus, unless they qualify for an exception, LECs such as Southwestern Bell are precluded from tailoring rates to specific customers. … The Commission reasoned that evidence that a putative customer for a particular service has requested bids does not establish that there truly are actual competitors to Southwestern Bell.

Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Thomas

838 F.2d 1224 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 22, 1988

The grandfathering is available where the source owner establishes its reliance on the formula “in establishing an emission limitation,” 40 C.F.R. § 51.1 (ii)(2)(ii), meaning, all agree, that the agency looks to the source … The fact that a source’s stack has been found to comply with a former definition of GEP clearly does not suggest that the stack qualifies under the current, more stringent standard.

Richard B. Kay v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America

443 F.2d 638 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 28, 1970

is interpreted erroneously 30 and legislative silence in the face of such interpretation is not necessarily equivalent to legislative approval. 31 However, a consistent administrative interpretation of a statute, shown clearly … The 467,495 votes received by the electors of the American Independent Party for the offices of President and Vice President established the party in the state sufficiently to create it as a recognized party for the 1970

Constancia A. Vda De Daylo v. Administrator of Veterans' Affairs

501 F.2d 811 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 26, 1974

But, if so, the intent was nowhere clearly expressed. … But the fact remains that this intent is nowhere clearly expressed. 32 . H.R.Rep.No.91-1166, supra note 7, at 11. 33 .

F.J. Vollmer Company, Inc. v. John W. Magaw, Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, U.S. Department of the Treasury

102 F.3d 591 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 24, 1996

The Bureau denied the first application, concluding that the receiver' qualified as a prohibited ma-chinegun and that its combination with a legally possessed machinegun conversion kit could not alter its’ illegal status. … However, “a finding that an agency acted arbitrarily and capriciously by denying equal treatment to similarly situated parties” — we would say clearly similarly situated — or by failing to enforce a rule where it plainly

Buckley v. Valeo

519 F.2d 821 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 29, 1975

to submit to a Commission audit of his qualified campaign expenses. … Id. § 9004(a)(3). 77 Subtitle H establishes different paths to general election funding by defining "candidate" in two different ways: either the nominee of a major party, or an individual qualified to have his name (or those

Henderson v. George Washington University

449 F.3d 127 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 2, 2006

The record in this case clearly belies this conclusion. C. … Salem clearly has probative value, although to what degree is unclear. Immediately following Dr.

Brayton v. Office of United States Trade Representative

641 F.3d 521 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Apr 19, 2011

If the government’s initial decision to withhold was clearly justified, that was the end of the analysis. … He argues that this effectively nullifies the statute’s lenient “not insubstantial” standard, replacing it with the stricter requirement that a plaintiff’s claim be correct on the merits to qualify for an award.