UM Law LogoHome | Directory | Search | Site Map | Thurgood Marshall Law Library 
Prospective StudentsCurrent StudentsFaculty & StaffAlumni & FriendsPublic

Environmental Regulation Casebook

Image of Casebook

Environmental Law Casebook Information

Home

Authors

New Sample Syllabi

Photo Tour

Supreme Court Predictions

Cases to Watch

Meet the Agencies

News You Can Use

Printing Problems?

Comments/Questions

Environmental Law Program

Predict the Supreme Court

supreme court image

Oral argument at the Supreme Court is much better theater today than it was two decades ago. The Justices then were not nearly as active in asking counsel questions as the Justices of today. Except for Justice Thomas, all of today's Justices are active questioners and they often use oral argument as a vehicle to debate each other. The Supreme Court Justices' questioning during oral arguments provide valuable clues as to how they will vote on a given case. As a result, it has become remarkably easy for those attending oral argument to forecast the outcome of certain cases. Even without attending the argument, it is often possible to predict the vote.

As of August 2009, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear only one environmental case during its 2009-2010 Term.



ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CASES TO BE HEARD
DURING THE SUPREME COURT’S 2009-2010 TERM:

Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Florida Department of Environmental Conservation,
No. 08-1151.

Issue Presented: Did the Florida Supreme Court’s decision to approve the Florida Beach and Shore Preservation Act to unilaterally restore eroded beaches and modify constitutional littoral property rights without a judicial hearing or the payment of just compensation constitute a “judicial taking” and a violation of the due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution?  The Florida Supreme Court rejected the property owners’ claim that the legislation, which gives the state title to land created through public beach replenishment efforts, constitutes a regulatory taking by depriving upland property owners of their common law littoral rights of accretion and reliction, which ensure their property will have water contact, because it protects their littoral right of water access.  Walton County v. Stop the Beach Renourishment, 998 So. 2d 1102, 1120-21 (2008).


If you wish to predict the outcome of these cases, send your predictions to rpercival@law.umaryland.edu.

Predictions will be collected and tallied before the Justices' opinion is published. The winner will be announced on this page shortly thereafter.

Thank you for playing "Predict the Supreme Court."

© 2009 University of Maryland, School of Law.  All Rights Reserved

500 W. Baltimore Street UMB Seal Baltimore, MD 21201-1786