Waldron, Maya2019-09-252019-09-252010-11-01201000461121http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/175833"In Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Interior (CBD v. DOI), the Ninth Circuit held that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) failed to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Federal Land Policy Management Act (FLMPA) in evaluating the environmental impacts of a proposed land exchange between the federal government and a mining company, Asarco, LLC.1 The BLM assumed that mining would take place under both the noaction alternative and the proposed exchange. It thus neglected to consider the difference between the mining of public lands, which are subject to the Mining Law of 1872, and the mining of private lands, which are not. Because of this omission, the majority reversed the district court’s holding and concluded the BLM had not taken a “hard look” at the potential environmental impacts of the exchange, in violation of NEPA, and that the proposed land exchange was “arbitrary and capricious,” in violation of FLPMA." (p. 1)engWith permission of the license/copyright holderenvironmental protectionlandlawPolitical ethicsEnvironmental ethicsEthics of lawRights based legal ethicsResources ethicsBiodiversity ethicsArticle