Northwest Ecosystem Alliance v. United States Fish & Wildlife Service’s Empirical Analysis
475 F.3d 1136 · 2007
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 32 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 95 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2025 · most notably Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024), San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority v. Jewell (2014)
28 federal appellate · 32 district · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · Califano v. Sanders · United States v. Mead Corp.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 95 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“highly deferential, presuming the agency action to be valid and affirming the agency action if a reasonable basis exists for its decision.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“any distinct population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Review under the arbitrary and capricious standard is narrow, and we do not substitute our judgment for that of the agency. Rather we will reverse a decision as arbitrary and capricious only if the agency relied on factors Congress did not intend it to consider, entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, or offered an explanation that runs counter to the evidence before the agency or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of agency expertise.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.