In Re USA
624 F.3d 1368
11th Cir.2010Background
- Everglades pollution involves phosphorus runoff altering Everglades ecology and Florida’s phosphorus rule and amendments were challenged under the Clean Water Act.
- Tribe and Friends of the Everglades filed complaints challenging Florida amendments to water quality standards and the EPA’s approval of the phosphorus rule.
- District court consolidated actions and granted summary judgment in Tribe/Friends’ favor in 2008, finding changes to Florida standards and parts of the phosphorus rule invalid or not properly reviewed.
- In 2009 the EPA sought contempt findings for noncompliance; the court ordered a new Amended Determination and a hearing.
- The April 14, 2010 order required Administrator appearance; the EPA moved to substitute the Assistant Administrator for Water; the district court denied the substitution and scheduled the October 7, 2010 hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether mandamus is warranted to substitute the official for appearance | EPA argues extraordinary circumstances justify substitution | District court held Administrator necessary for policy questions | Yes, substitution allowed; no special need for Administrator |
| Whether there was special need for the Administrator’s presence | No special need; Deputy could suffice | Administrator’s policy role is essential | No special need; Deputy adequate |
| Whether district court abused discretion by denying substitution | Discretion improperly encroaches on separation of powers | Court required personal appearance due to national importance | District court abused discretion; mandamus granted |
Key Cases Cited
- In re United States, 985 F.2d 510 (11th Cir. 1993) (mandamus available to review appearance orders; special need required when possible witnesses exist)
- Morgan, 313 U.S. 409 (Supreme Court 1941) (Secretary subjected to appearance; separation of powers concerns emphasized)
- Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997) (presidential immunity; official burdens; separation of powers considerations)
