National Ass'n of Home Builders v. United States Army Corps of Engineers
398 U.S. App. D.C. 308
D.C. Cir.2011Background
- NAHB challenges Corps's NWP 46 authorizing discharges into certain non-tidal ditches under Clean Water Act §404(e).
- NWP 46 allows expedited authorization for upland ditches meeting four criteria, including being waters of the United States.
- District court dismissed on merits but found NAHB had standing; NAHB appeals on standing grounds.
- Court reviews standing de novo; NAHB must show injury, causation, and redressability for at least one member.
- Record shows Corps had asserted jurisdiction over some upland ditches pre-NWP 46, and NAHB had ongoing opposition to Corps jurisdiction.
- NAHB seeks either vacatur of NWP 46 or a declaration that upland ditches are off limits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether NAHB has organizational standing | NAHB has associational injury via member standing | No injury traceable to NWP 46; only preexisting risk | No standing for NAHB |
| Whether NAHB has standing through its members | Members have imminent injury from jurisdictional uncertainty | Injury not fairly traceable to NWP 46 | No member standing established |
| Whether NAHB's alleged injury is redressable by vacating NWP 46 | Vacatur would reduce enforcement risk for members | NWP 46 did not worsen the risk; relief would be unhelpful | Redressability lacking; vacatur inappropriate |
| Whether NAHB has standing for a declaratory judgment independent of the injury | Declaratory relief would alleviate jurisdictional cloud | Relief would not remedy actual injury to members | Declaratory relief insufficient |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing requires injury, causation, redressability)
- Sierra Club v. EPA, 292 F.3d 895 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (associational standing requires at least one member with standing)
- Hunt v. Wash. State Apple Advertising Comm'n, 432 U.S. 333 (1987) (associational standing prerequisites)
- NAHB v. Army Corps of Eng'rs, 417 F.3d 1272 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (standing where Corps altered existing NWPs to limit injury)
- United States v. Deaton, 332 F.3d 698 (4th Cir. 2003) (Corps asserted jurisdiction over a roadside ditch)
- Nat'l Taxpayers Union, Inc. v. United States, 68 F.3d 1428 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (mere organizational resources spent is insufficient for standing)
- Ass'n for Retarded Citizens v. Dallas Cnty. Mental Health & Mental Retardation Ctr. Bd. of Trustees, 19 F.3d 241 (5th Cir. 1994) (standing requires concrete injury, not just response to agency action)