The U.S. Supreme Court might not have to decide soon questions relating to environmental law.
The justices dismissed on Monday the only case raising such questions that had been on its docket for next year.
In an unsigned, one-line order the Court vacated the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in U.S. Forest Service v. Pacific Rivers Council and ordered the district court to dismiss the case on mootness grounds.
The Court's action has alarmed some commentators.
Richard M. Frank, a University of California at Davis law professor, wrote on the respected Legal Planet blog that the order might reflect a belief by environmental advocacy organizations that they cannot get a fair hearing at the Supreme Court.
Frank explained that the plaintiffs in the case, including Portland-based Pacific Rivers Council, entered into an agreement with the United States government not to further challenge USDA Forest Service's compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act in a dispute over planning of management actions on national forests in the Sierra Nevada mountains.
The Ninth Circuit rejected the 2004 planning effort on grounds that the Forest Service's efforts did not properly account for the impacts of planned extraction and other activities on fish populations within the national forests in that region.
Historically, NEPA has not faired well in the Court. One analysis demonstrated that environmental groups have never convinced the Court to rule in their favor in a case arising under the law in its entire 44-year history.
Other environmental laws have also not fared well before the Court lately. During this year's term the justices overturned two Ninth Circuit decisions that enforced the Clean Water Act.