Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Biden's administration has said the program is authorized under a 1976 federal law called the Magnuson-Stevens Act to protect against overfishing in U.S. coastal waters.
The U.S. Supreme Court this week is set to hear a bid by commercial fishermen to avoid costs associated with a government-run fish conservation program in a dispute that gives its conservative ...
Hawaii Wildlife Fund, No. 18-260, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case involving pollution discharges under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The case asked whether the Clean Water Act requires a permit when pollutants that originate from a non-point source can be traced to reach navigable waters through mechanisms such as ...
The Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act is the primary law governing marine fisheries management in United States federal waters. The law is named after U.S. Senators Warren G. Magnuson of Washington state and Ted Stevens of Alaska, who sponsored the Senate bill, S. 200, that eventually was enacted.
Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing poses a global challenge and has significant economic and environmental repercussions. [5] The impact of IUU fishing includes economic losses, job losses, scarcity, price distortion, food insecurity and unfair competition, [6] together with the depletion of fish populations and damages to the marine habitat. [7]
The number of fish on the government's overfishing list sunk to a new low last year in a sign of healthy U.S. fisheries, federal officials said. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ...
A key question that was before Hawaii Supreme Court was whether state laws controlling health care insurance reimbursement also apply to casualty and property insurance in limiting companies’ ability to pursue independent legal action against those held liable. The justices answered yes.
Cayetano, 528 U.S. 495 (2000), was a case filed in 1996 by Big Island rancher Harold "Freddy" Rice against the state of Hawaii and argued before the United States Supreme Court. In 2000, the Court ruled that the state could not restrict eligibility to vote in elections for the Board of Trustees of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs to persons of ...