Case Summary--Winter v. Natural Resources et al.

As predicted in the case summary, the Court in Winter reversed the 9th Circuit and dismissed the preliminary injuction against the Navy entered by the district court and affirmed by the 9th Circuit. That injunction would have prohibited the Navy from using a certain kind of sonar technology in its training that possibly could irreparably injure several species of marine life off the CA coast, where the naval exercises take place. The Chief Justice, who wrote the opinion, took pains to point out that the decision wasn't based on the merits of the case, but only on whether a preliminary injunction was warranted, but he left no uncertainty as to his opinion on that matter--that when "weighing the equities" of the situation, the Navy's interest in public safety ought to trump the environmentalists' in protecting the hearing of some marine mammals. Indeed, the last sentence of my summary seems to be right "on target," though the Chief Justice would never be heard to utter such a statement in public.

A Few Legal Principles

Since the facts are readily available from my summary, I will confine myself here to the legal argument, taken from the Syllabus of the decision. First, we begin with the conclusion of the lower courts and the Supreme Court's response:

"The lower courts held that when a plaintiff demonstrates a strong likelihood of success on the merits, a preliminary injunction may be entered based only on a “possibility” of irreparable harm. The “possibility” standard is too lenient. This Court's frequently reiterated standard requires plaintiffs seeking preliminary relief to demonstrate that irreparable injury is likely in the absence of an injunction."

But, even if the lower courts had used the correct standard, the following would have resulted:

"Even if plaintiffs have demonstrated a likelihood of irreparable injury, such injury is outweighed by the public interest and the Navy's interest in effective, realistic training of its sailors. For the same reason, it is unnecessary to address the lower courts' holding that plaintiffs have established a likelihood of success on the merits."

A preliminary injunction, as the Chief Justice explained, is an "extraordinary remedy never awarded as of right." That means you really have to make a case for it. The courts must balance the competing claims of injury and consider the effect of granting or withholding the requested relief, particularly with regard to public consequences. Military interests don't always trump all other considerations, but courts "must" give deference to the professional judgment of military authorities concerning the relative importance of a particular military interest. Hail to the Chiefs...

What does the record show in this case? The crucial paragraph follows:

"Here, the record contains declarations from some of the Navy's most senior officers, all of whom underscored the threat posed by enemy submarines and the need for extensive sonar training to counter this threat. Those officers emphasized that realistic training cannot be accomplished under the two challenged restrictions imposed by the District Court-the 2,200-yard shutdown zone and the power-down requirement during surface ducting conditions. The use of MFA sonar under realistic conditions during training exercises is clearly of the utmost importance to the Navy and the Nation. The Court does not question the importance of plaintiffs' ecological, scientific, and recreational interests, but it concludes that the balance of equities and consideration of the overall public interest tip strongly in favor of the Navy. The determination of where the public interest lies in this case does not strike the Court as a close question."

Well, the last words should read--it doesn't strike a "majority" of the Court as a close question. Indeed, there were two dissenters (Ginsburg, Souter) and two others only agreed with part of the decision (Stephens, Breyer). But the result wasn't unexpected.

Conclusion

I don't suppose that this defeat will discourage environmental groups from bringing other lawsuits. Indeed, I imagine that numerous issues are just heating up, despite the fact that there will be a change in administrations. But for now, it is Anchors Aweigh.

3927