Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court rules for Navy in sonar use
Supreme Court of the United States Blog ^ | November 12, 2008 | SCOTUSblog

Posted on 11/12/2008 7:29:52 AM PST by NinoFan

The Supreme Court, dividing deeply, upheld the Navy’s power to use sonar in military training exercises, even though the technology threatens marine life in the training zone off the Pacific Coast. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., wrote for the majority; there were three full dissents and one partial dissent. The decision, the Court’s first ruling of the Term, came in the case of Winter (Navy Secretary) v. National Resources Defense Council, et al. (07-1239).

The Court partially overturned a federal judge’s order against the use of the active sonar at least until the Navy took additional measures to mitigate the threat to whales, dolphines and other marine mammals. Those added measures would have required the Navy to stop its sonar exercises when the threat to mammals was deemed imminent. The ruling set aside the District Court injunction to the extent challenged by the Navy.

Roberts wrote that “the Navy’s need to conduct realistic training with active sonar to respond to the threat posed by enemy submarines plainly outweighs” the environmental concerns raised by advocacy groups.


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: navy; scotus; sonar; submarine; vieques

1 posted on 11/12/2008 7:29:53 AM PST by NinoFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NinoFan

Unbelievable that this even COMES before the USSC.


2 posted on 11/12/2008 7:32:15 AM PST by LS ("Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually." (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan

What real double blind studies exist indicating sonar harms marine mammals.

Studies by GreenPeace or other such are not admissible.


3 posted on 11/12/2008 7:32:58 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 . Save America......... put out lots of waferin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan
Those added measures would have required the Navy to stop its sonar exercises when the threat to mammals was deemed imminent.

Which is impossible to judge, so this is foolishness.

4 posted on 11/12/2008 7:36:17 AM PST by doodad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan

The Navy should train while it last, the Supreme Court is about to get a lot more radical in the near future.


5 posted on 11/12/2008 7:36:45 AM PST by NavVet ( If you don't defend Conservatism in the Primaries, you won't have it to defend in November)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

Unbelievable that this even COMES before the USSC.

Things like this are why they will not get to hear the birth certificate case(s).


6 posted on 11/12/2008 7:37:16 AM PST by Cyclone59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LS

And it was another 5-4 decision. Even one Obama appointment to the SCOTUS will have devastating results to America.


7 posted on 11/12/2008 7:39:20 AM PST by RightField (A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well,.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan

This calls for a PING ping.


8 posted on 11/12/2008 7:42:01 AM PST by Thrownatbirth (.....Iraq Invasion fan since '91.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS; bert; P-Marlowe; enat

Demonstrating how desperate is the situation with Scotus is the vote, 5-4. Someone convinced 4 of our Scotus justices that the security of the nation takes a back seat to Flipper and Free Willie.

Obama will replace 3 of those 4 with 40 year olds within the next 4 years. McCain is already on record despising the filibustering of justices, so you can bet that he and the other Rinos will roll over on the American people even if Bernadette Dohrn, a lawyer, gets the nod from Obamaland.


9 posted on 11/12/2008 7:42:24 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain Pro Deo et Patria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RightField
And it was another 5-4 decision. Even one Obama appointment to the SCOTUS will have devastating results to America.

The third one is the one I worry about. I think Ginsburg and Stevens are going to leave pretty soon. They will probably retire effective at the end of the term, giving Obama enough notice to get replacements through the Senate. I don't know who will be the next to go, but I worry about Scalia making it another four or eight years. Thomas, Alito and Roberts are all relatively young.

10 posted on 11/12/2008 7:44:41 AM PST by KarlInOhio (11/4: The revolutionary socialists beat the Fabian ones. Where can we find a capitalist party?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan
even though the technology threatens marine life

Threatens? In what way?

It makes noises they may not like, or they may love the noise. Who knows? Whales can't talk to us, despite goofy hippy wishes.

11 posted on 11/12/2008 7:46:40 AM PST by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan; Doohickey; judicial meanz; submarinerswife; PogySailor; chasio649; gobucks; Bottom_Gun; ...
Ping ) ) ) ) )
12 posted on 11/12/2008 7:48:26 AM PST by SmithL (Drill Dammit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bert
What real double blind studies exist indicating sonar harms marine mammals.

Hey, I suggest that you try putting a blindfold on all of those manatees, before you start to complain!

13 posted on 11/12/2008 7:49:11 AM PST by Alex Murphy ( "Every country has the government it deserves" - Joseph Marie de Maistre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan
The Navy of the future is here today.
14 posted on 11/12/2008 7:49:28 AM PST by Eye of Unk (Aleutica, the new name of Free Alaska)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan

What?.....A sense of sanity from the supreme court?


15 posted on 11/12/2008 7:49:34 AM PST by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Uh - remember that motor mouthed parrot Hannity back in 05 - “It’s very simple - an up and down vote! An up and down vote! etc etc “
Not such a good idea when the tide has turned is it?


16 posted on 11/12/2008 7:50:04 AM PST by Seajay (Ordem e Progresso)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan

Good thing they got it in when they did. Four years from now, it wouldn’t surprise me a bit if Obummer saw to it the Navy got welded to the pier.


17 posted on 11/12/2008 7:57:14 AM PST by OCCASparky (Steely-Eyed Killer of the Deep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightField

A couple of the judges admit they have been waiting for a democrat president in office to resign, Ginsburg would have had to be taken out feet first and cold to the touch before she would ever let President Bush replace her.


18 posted on 11/12/2008 7:59:11 AM PST by Abathar (Proudly posting without reading the article carefully since 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan; All

We can look forward to these narrow conservative rulings instead of a clear-cut conservative rulings thanks to Obama.

There is NO WAY Ginsburg or Stevens will not either die or retire in the next 4 years. Just no way.

We were so close to finally getting a conservative court, and that is what I will regret most about Obama winning, at least so far....

Hopefully nobody will retire or die on the conservative side, even Kennedy. If Kennedy leaves, he will be replaced by a die-hard liberal, and the court will switch from narrow conservative/moderate to narrow liberal, but they will win every time, not just sometimes like present....


19 posted on 11/12/2008 8:00:10 AM PST by rwfromkansas ("Carve your name on hearts, not marble." - C.H. Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan
US SC decision in Winter v. National Resources Defense Council

For the record, the USSC merely overturned the grant of a preliminary injunction against the Navy. Second the dissent was principally Ginsberg and Souter. Breyer's dissent is very different and he does not uphold the original injunction at all.

20 posted on 11/12/2008 8:06:32 AM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seajay

I understood McCain’s objection about losing the filibuster a few year’s back, and I disagreed with him on the Constitution. I still do. The wording of the Constitution specifically spells out the process of approving presidential nominees. Although the Senate does have the authority to establish its own rules, it doesn’t seem to me that they have the power to use those rules to derail a specified Constitutional process.

Would I have to take the good with the bad in that case? Yes, and I said so at the time.

Nonetheless, since they chose to preserve the filibuster, and no one has challenged it, then I’m willing to play by the current rules. I don’t think, however, that Republicans will filibuster dem judicial appointments.


21 posted on 11/12/2008 8:08:29 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain Pro Deo et Patria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan

>Roberts wrote that “the Navy’s need to conduct realistic training with active sonar to respond to the threat posed by enemy submarines plainly outweighs” the environmental concerns raised by advocacy groups.

And he is correct. He should also note that these so-called “advocacy groups” advocate the destruction of America.

They can leave anytime...if another country will have them.


22 posted on 11/12/2008 8:10:08 AM PST by soycd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

Having already read it, It seems like a pretty strong win for national defense. Considering the importance of these exercises, an injunction is about as bad as you can get.

Also:

“At the same time, what we have said makes clear that it
would be an abuse of discretion to enter a permanent
injunction, after final decision on the merits, along the
same lines as the preliminary injunction. An injunction is
a matter of equitable discretion; it does not follow from
success on the merits as a matter of course. “


23 posted on 11/12/2008 8:14:01 AM PST by NinoFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: soycd

Did they sue the Russians and Chinese too? Their subs use sonor. To kill ours!


24 posted on 11/12/2008 8:14:55 AM PST by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Those 4 were convinced before the trial


25 posted on 11/12/2008 8:16:21 AM PST by Loud Mime (CHANGE: Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan
Here's the heart of the decision:

The court did not deal with the merits of the claims put forward by the environmental groups. It said, rather, that federal courts abused their discretion by ordering the Navy to limit sonar use in some cases and to turn it off altogether in others.

AP via SFGate

26 posted on 11/12/2008 8:17:18 AM PST by SmithL (Drill Dammit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS
Has everything gone insane?

I want to know the number to call our government to get a bailout as well. It is INSANE!

27 posted on 11/12/2008 8:19:08 AM PST by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LS

Thank god for Roberts and Alito, at least they’ll be there for a while.

I still can’t believe Stevens made it from 80 to 88 under Bush and is still there. What were the actuarial odds in 2000 of both Stevens and Ginsburg still being here in 2008? Just bad luck, I guess. If Bush could have replaced Stevens this loss would have been a lot easier. We were so close to taking the court back fir a generation, overturning Roe and other bad decisions, and now...not so much

we should all pray pray Scalia and Kennedy stay on through 2012. They’re both 72 now not exactly spring chickens. Scalia especially doesn’t appear to getting any thinner.

If Obama replaces one of the liberals that’s bad enough but it doesn’t really change the balance on the court. If he gets to replace Scalia and/or Kennedy, Conservatives will never win an important SC case for at least another 10 years.

Looking back, one of the ture blesings of luck we had was that no SC justices left under Carter, and Reagan and Bush had 6 appointments. Can you imagine if 2 or Justices had stepped down and been replaced by Carter???


28 posted on 11/12/2008 8:28:27 AM PST by jeltz25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NavVet

Hopefully Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Thomas can hold on for 4 years


29 posted on 11/12/2008 8:34:59 AM PST by Vaquero ("an armed society is a polite society" Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

If Obama gets in there, I’m sure he’ll appoint justices who don’t care one bit about this nation’s defense. It wouldn’t surprise me if they’re as extreme as Justice Douglas who tried to stop the Vietnam War.


30 posted on 11/12/2008 8:38:26 AM PST by NinoFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan
even though the technology threatens marine life

Chinese and Russian technology threaten human life. Gee, thanks for actually letting us defend it

/s

31 posted on 11/12/2008 8:52:05 AM PST by montag813 (www.FreepShop.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightField
And it was another 5-4 decision. Even one Obama appointment to the SCOTUS will have devastating results to America.

Even with 2 Obama appointments, the decision would still be 5-4. That's the good news. The bad news is he gets to renew the 2 Marxists on the Court for perhaps another 30 years.

32 posted on 11/12/2008 8:54:10 AM PST by montag813 (www.FreepShop.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Obama will replace 3 of those 4 with 40 year olds within the next 4 years.

2 max.

33 posted on 11/12/2008 8:54:53 AM PST by montag813 (www.FreepShop.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: montag813

Assuming Scalia stays in good health


34 posted on 11/12/2008 8:55:25 AM PST by NinoFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan
...until the Navy took additional measures to mitigate the threat to whales, dolphines and other...

...cute, cuddly animals.

35 posted on 11/12/2008 9:04:52 AM PST by randog (What the...?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan
Roberts wrote that “the Navy’s need to conduct realistic training with active sonar to respond to the threat posed by enemy submarines plainly outweighs” the environmental concerns raised by advocacy groups.

Precisely.

What is unsaid is that everyone involved (save for community organizees) must know (or reasonably suspect) that this has NOTHING to do with whales and EVERYTHING to do with attempting to weaken the defense and military of the U. S.

36 posted on 11/12/2008 9:39:45 AM PST by Seaplaner (Never give in. Never give in. Never...except to convictions of honour and good sense. W. Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montag813; P-Marlowe; enat

Stevens and Ginsberg for age & health reasons.

Breyer is a 71 year old Clinton appointee. I have no reason to question his health or fitness, but the opportunity to step down with a liberal doing the appointing and a huge dem majority in the Senate might be very attractive to him and his party.

If they could get 3 40-something liberals on the bench, they’d lock down 3 liberal seats for decades. It would be tempting for the libs to have a “come to Jesus meeting” with Justice Breyer.


37 posted on 11/12/2008 9:50:34 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain Pro Deo et Patria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan

Of course, if the court had gone the other way, or if a future Congress passes a law to protect the whales, guess where the Navy will do its sonar thing?


38 posted on 11/12/2008 10:12:15 AM PST by dbz77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NinoFan
From post #7: Ginsburg would have had to be taken out feet first and cold to the touch before she would ever let President Bush replace her.

I would love to see Scalia have the same attitude regarding President Obama.

39 posted on 11/12/2008 1:41:00 PM PST by RightField (A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well,.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson