Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

California Trout, et al. v. Hoopa Valley Tribe, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, No. 14-1271 · judgment January 25, 2019


Certiorari denied · December 9, 2019
Pre-decision estimate: 6% cert probability (95% interval 4%–9%)

Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a D.C. Circuit decision below, a circuit split argued in the petition, and counsel who has filed here before.

Question presented

The federal government licenses projects that affect the nation’s waters, but the role of ensuring that these projects comply with water-quality requirements is reserved for the states. Under the Clean Water Act, applicants for these projects must request and obtain a certification from the affected states that any discharges into the water will comply with federal and state water-quality requirements. States must “act” within one year of a request, or under section 401 of the Clean Water Act, they waive their authority to certify the applicant’s compliance with water-quality requirements. 33 U.S.C. § 1341. In complex cases, however, applicants and states alike require more than a year to develop the record that states need to make a decision. Thus, applicants often withdraw and resubmit their request before the oneyear period expires to avoid forcing the state to decide the request prematurely. In the decision below, however, the D.C. Circuit held that when applicants take this approach, it results in a waiver of the states’ Clean Water Act authority. In doing so, the court deepened a circuit conflict, and it struck a significant blow to the states’ role in ensuring the quality of our nation’s waters. The question presented is: Do states waive their authority under section 401 of the Clean Water Act if they do not approve or deny a certification request within one year, even when an applicant withdraws and resubmits the request before that one year ends?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Andrew Harry Erteschik
Poyner Spruill LLP

For respondent
Noel John Francisco
Jones Day

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Amicus briefs
1 cert-stage

Linked docket
19A92

Proceedings

  1. Dec 09 2019
    Petition DENIED. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
  2. Nov 13 2019
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/6/2019.
  3. Nov 06 2019
    Reply of petitioners California Trout, et al. filed.
  4. Oct 28 2019
    Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
  5. Oct 28 2019
    Brief of respondent PacifiCorp in opposition filed.
  6. Oct 28 2019
    Brief of respondent Hoopa Valley Tribe in opposition filed.
  7. Sep 27 2019
    Brief amici curiae of State of Oregon, et al. filed.
  8. Sep 19 2019
    Motion of the Solicitor General to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 28, 2019, for all respondents.
  9. Sep 18 2019
    Motion of the Solicitor General to extend the time to file a response from September 27, 2019 to October 28, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
  10. Sep 10 2019
    Waiver of right of respondent County of Siskiyou to respond filed.
  11. Sep 09 2019
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended for all respondents to and including October 28, 2019.
  12. Sep 06 2019
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 27, 2019 to October 28, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
  13. Aug 30 2019
    Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, California Trout, et al.
  14. Aug 26 2019
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 27, 2019)
  15. Jul 23 2019
    Application (19A92) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until August 26, 2019.
  16. Jul 19 2019
    Application (19A92) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from July 25, 2019 to August 26, 2019, submitted to The Chief Justice.