Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

United States Vs. Scrap

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 18, 1973

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

60 entries 2 linked 58 unlinked
Show
  1. Scripps-howard Radio, Inc. Vs. Fcc US Supreme Court · Apr 06, 1942
  2. Sierra Club Vs. Morton US Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1972
  3. U.S. 669 (1973) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. SCRAP
    Search
  4. U.S. 669 (1973) United States v. Students
    Search
  5. had standing to sue. The court held that its power to grant an injunction was not barred by Arrow Transportation Co. v. Southern
    Search
  6. Administrative Procedure Act to withstand a motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of standing to sue. Sierra Club v. Morton
    Search
  7. id. at 195, and distinguished our recent decision in Sierra Club v. Morton
    Search
  8. the court found that its power to grant an injunction was not barred by our decision in Arrow Transportation Co. v. Southern
    Search
  9. Page 412 U. S. 684 were vague, unsubstantiated, and insufficient under our recent decision in Sierra Club v. Morton
    Search
  10. allegations insufficient. Page 412 U. S. 686 Relying upon our prior decisions in Data Processing Service v. Camp
    Search
  11. U. S. 150 , and Barlow v. Collins
    Search
  12. across the Nation could be adversely affected by major governmental actions. See, e.g., Environmental Defense Fund v. Hardin
    Search
  13. Reade v. Ewing
    Search
  14. F.Supp. at 197, it concluded that our decision in Arrow Transportation Co. v. Southern
    Search
  15. the courts had been asked to enjoin rates during the statutory seven-month period. See, e.g., M. C. Kiser Co. v. Central
    Search
  16. Freeport Sulphur Co. v. United
    Search
  17. Bison S.S. Corp. v. United
    Search
  18. Luckenbach S.S. Co. v. United
    Search
  19. Carlsen v. United
    Search
  20. had held that they were without power to compel the Commission to grant a rate suspension. See, e.g., Bison S.S. Corp. v. United
    Search
  21. Freeport Sulphur Co. v. United
    Search
  22. on the decisions of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Calvert Cliffs' Coordinating Comm. v. Atomic
    Search
  23. Energy Comm'n, 146 U.S.App.D.C. 33, 449 F.2d 1109, and Committee for Nuclear Responsibility, Inc. v. Seaborg
    Search
  24. if an agency has complied with NEPA, and to grant equitable relief if it has not, cf. Arrow Transportation Co. v. Southern
    Search
  25. U.S. at 372 U. S. 668 . As the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit explained in Port of New York Authority v. United
    Search
  26. Together with No. 72-562, Aberdeen & Rockfish Railroad Co. et al. v. Students
    Search
  27. are questions not raised here. No party now maintains that these cases are moot. Cf. Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. ICC
    Search
  28. to be vindicated by plaintiffs with no more at stake in the outcome of an action than a fraction of a vote, see Baker v. Carr
    Search
  29. fine and costs, see McGowan v. Maryland
    Search
  30. poll tax, Harper v. Virginia
    Search
  31. assessment commonly made in suspension orders. See, e.g., the suspension orders quoted in Naph-Sol Refining Co. v. United
    Search
  32. Oscar Mayer & Co. v. United
    Search
  33. its February 1 order that the surcharge was not considered a prescribed rate within the meaning of Arizona Grocery Co. v. Atchison
    Search
  34. rate. Moss v. CAB
    Search
  35. See Greene County Planning Board v. FPC
    Search
  36. Calvert Cliffs' Coordinating Comm. v. Atomic
    Search
  37. City of New York v. United
    Search
  38. Cohen v. Price
    Search
  39. Arrow Transportation Co. v. Southern
    Search
  40. by the Commission whether or not to suspend rates is not subject to judicial review. See Port of New York Authority v. United
    Search
  41. M. C. Kiser Co. v. Central
    Search
  42. that the appellees view as broad enough to encompass alleged noncompliance with NEPA. See Naph-Sol Refining Co. v. United
    Search
  43. Long Island R. Co. v. United
    Search
  44. as to my posture, I add a few words. For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Sierra Club v. Morton
    Search
  45. U.S. Supreme Court United States v. SCRAP
    Search
  46. United States v. Students
    Search
  47. Data Processing Service v. Camp
    Search
  48. and Barlow v. Collins
    Search
  49. Environmental Defense Fund v. Hardin
    Search
  50. Nuclear Responsibility, Inc. v. Seaborg
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial