Does Judge Molloy Retain Jurisdiction To Rule On Wolves?

Home > Does Judge Molloy Retain Jurisdiction To Rule On Wolves?

*Editor’s Note* – At the time I first wrote this article, I believed that there might have been a typo of Harriet Hageman’s quote about an appeal to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. As such I made note below of the change. I have since learned I was wrong and Ms. Hageman was correct.

There are two separate cases that are being dealt with here, in which both are on appeal to a higher court. In Wyoming Wolf Coalition v. USFWS, Judge Johnson ruled that the USFWS was arbitrary and capricious in rejecting Wyoming’s wolf management plan. That case has been appealed to the 10th Circuit Court. The case of Defenders of Wildlife v. USFWS, Judge Donald Molloy placed wolves back under federal protection claiming that Idaho and Montana could not be singled out for delisting while excluding Wyoming. That case has been appealed to the 9th Circuit Court as was originally pointed out by Harriet Hageman.

It is because of the appeal of the Defenders v. USFWS to the 9th Court that Ms. Hageman believes Judge Molloy lost his jurisdiction to further litigate this case.

There never seems to be a shortage of confusion, questions, and legal outrage in cases about gray wolves that Montana District Judge Donald Molloy rules on. In question is his latest odd rendering in Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This particular case involves an appeal by Defenders of the implementation of an expanded Section 10(j) of the Endangered Species Act. Judge Molloy ordered both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Defenders to return to his court on February 22 to convince him why he shouldn’t dismiss the case.

Another issue that has been raised is whether or not Judge Donald Molloy has the jurisdiction to make a ruling on wolf cases concerning the Northern Rocky Mountains Distinct Population Segment when those cases have been appealed to a higher court.

Harriet Hageman was the attorney representing the Wyoming Wolf Coalition in the case of Wyoming Wolf Coalition v. USFWS. In that case Judge Alan Johnson ruled that the USFWS acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it suddenly disqualified Wyoming’s Wolf Management Plan. That ruling has since been appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court.

In recent comments made by Hageman, she had this to say about Judge Molloy’s jurisdiction:

Judge Molloy lost jurisdiction at the point that he issued his last decision and the matter was appealed to the 9th Circuit [10th Circuit]. District Court judges do not typically retain jurisdiction to issue whatever orders they see fit once the matter has been appealed to a higher court.

If I understand Hageman, what she is saying is that when Judge Molloy ruled to put gray wolves back under federal protection because the USFWS couldn’t separate Wyoming, according to boundaries, from the rest of the wolves in delisting, the judge lost control. Molloy’s ruling was challenged by the Wyoming Wolf Coalition, et. al. and Judge Johnson disagreed with some of Molloy’s opinion in previous rulings in his court.

Molloy’s contention was that Wyoming did not have an acceptable wolf management plan and therefore no wolves would be delisted until Wyoming had the right plan. Johnson’s ruling flies in Molloy’s face stating that the USFWS was arbitrary and capricious and that Wyoming does, in fact, have a viable wolf plan.

The USFWS has filed an appeal with the Tenth Circuit Court [Edited from the original that said "Ninth". In the quote above by Harriet Hageman it also said 9th.] and Ms. Hageman is questioning whether or not Judge Molloy has jurisdiction while this case is on appeal to be conducting court hearings concerning wolves in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming.

Not only is there a question concerning his jurisdiction in this case, as described by Hageman as an “order to show cause”, but there is serious legal wranglings going on as I write as to whether Judge Molloy can simply pound his gavel and declare the Nonessential Experimental wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains Distinct Population Segment, no longer Experimental. It is believed by many that there were specific rules governing the “experimental” release of gray wolves into the Greater Yellowstone area.

I’m sure there will be more written about Molloy’s order and those specific rules. Stay tuned.

Tom Remington

http://westinstenv.org Mike D.

I stand corrected. It appears that Molloy’s intent is to cement wolves as endangered before he retires, rather than fix the mess he made.

I didn’t catch the fact that his prior ruling in this case is under appeal, and he is attempting to redraft that ruling before the 9th Court reviews it. He wants a mulligan, but no mulligans are allowed in judicial decisions under appeal.

He should retire already. Take up a hobby, like wolf hunting for instance, and the judge thing a rest.
Barry

I find it both interesting and troubling that a judge has decided he has the ability to expand the actions of a suit even after he has ruled.

That suit was simply about the DPS being divided along state lines. he ruled on that, thus, the suit was settled at his level. His going “well, wait a minute” is not his action to take. This action is nothing more than leading of the plaintiff and an expansion of a suit I am not so sure he even has the legal authority to do, especially after the suit was over.

Molloy is nothing more than an extreme activist judge drunk on power. The AR folks and himself have stepped clear out of arena of even trying to claim any science is in play anymore.

If Molloy actually read the introduction rule of 1994, he would realize there is no grounds for removing the experimental designation on the introduced wolves, and it is in fact “the services” responsibility to remove any experimental wolves from a non experimental area as outlined by Ed Bangs himself in the 1994 final rule. If they have failed to do that, they are in fact in violation of their own rules governing wolf introduction.

This is just another ploy to once again move the goal posts and find any way possible to further their wolf worshiping ways.

The fallacy of genetic connectivity which has been shown to be unimportant by David Mech has allowed them a few years delay to stall the delisting, now they are running out of any excuses so they just want to throw out the rule book, they themselves, wrote.
Greg Farber

Ah yes, the joke empire ruled by radicals playing egyptian dictator gods again, yawn. Since no one but them has a say, this garbage isn’t even worth discussing anylonger, we’re the whiners down on our knees. The “system” is totaled. Try a longer screw driver boys, maybe that’ll work.
Bruce Hemming

http://yellowstone-is-dead.myshopify.com/products/yellowstone-is-dead

This documentary was put together by Scott Rockholm, it shows the fraud and corruption of the Canadian wolf introduction. The damage 15 years of no wolf control causes, the suffering of wildlife and livestock, and the hardships the wolves have caused ranchers and people who live in the country. If you want to learn the truth of what really happened in the Canadian wolf introduction, you need to see this documentary.

Does Judge Molloy Retain Jurisdiction To Rule On Wolves?

Related Posts

Tom Remington

Related Sites

Archives
Categories