07/13/05 The big day in court

07/13/05 The big day in court

When the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals comes to Seattle about once every month to hear various cases, it usually does so with little media coverage. Today's proceedings will be different. That's because several media are expected to gather to cover two separate cases. Each case however could have significant impacts on various sectors of the Northwest lifestyle and economy, and in one of those cases, have nationwide impacts. First, a Ninth Circuit panel will hear an appeal by U.S.D.A. on a lower court's temporary injunction closing our nation's border to Canadian live cattle and some beef products. And the interest from a media standpoint is not just from our country. Canada, as a nation generally and to its beef industry specifically, has experienced significant economic impacts as a result of the ban. So this hearing is big news to our neighbors to the North, so big that a variety of media outlets, including the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, are in Seattle to cover the hearing. The original suit filed by R-C.A.L.F. U.S.A. was based in part on concerns about Canadian b.s.e. cases and part on economics that a border closure would benefit U.S. cattle producers. And Harold Schumacher, an R-C.A.L.F. U.S.A. board member, says his side is confident SCHUMACHER: I feel that we are in a good position. I think our case is still very strong. But U.S.D.A.'s appeal includes several interveners supporting the reopening of the U.S. border to Canadian beef. It is uncertain if the hearing will produce an immediate ruling from the Ninth Circuit panel today or if the panel will take the matter under advisement. One thing for certain is a ruling will have a significant outcome in a hearing July 27th in a U.S. District Court in Montana. That is when Judge Richard Cebull considers another R-C.A.L.F. U.S.A. motion, this one to make the border closure permanent. The Ninth Circuit then switches gears later in the day when it considers an appeal by the Federal Government, Bonneville Power Administration, and the State of Idaho to overturn a lower court judge's ruling that allowed increased summer spill over four federal dams on the Columbia and Lower Snake Rivers to aid in migration of juveniles of endangered salmon species. Like the Canadian border case, this case includes several interveners on both sides of the issue. Environmental, fishing, and tribal interests say summer spill is needed to improve fish mortality. Government and power interests say the spill comes at potentially higher costs for ratepayers due to loss of power generation and sale of such power in the open market.
Previous Report07/12/05 Try to join again
Next Report07/14/05 C.R.P.`s future shape?