However, I think it is important to note that no law is being broken. A law
may not be enforced the way some people want it to be enforced. However,
that could be true for any other federal law. (Which is where my first point
came from.) There are already means in place to ensure the proper
enforcement of existing laws. Amendments can be passed. Revisions can be
made. Appeals can be filed. Officials can be elected.
Just because I don't like the way the government is enforcing it's laws, do
I have the right to sue? I would suggest other channels should be pursued.
If a citizen can sue, then let's make it fair and be able to sue all
branches of the government when it is perceived the law isn't being
adequately enforced.
How about if I sue my local police department because laws are being broken
by motorists who are speeding and I feel endangered as a result?
As you can see it gets frivolous and malicious. I don't think suing the
federal government is the most appropriate or most effective channel for
this fight.
SW
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Scharpf
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 3:50 PM
To: NANFA Mailing List
Subject: Re: NANFA-- Bush and the ESA
>What do you all think about the possibility of allowing citizens
>to sue the federal government for a lack of military involvement
>in third-world crisis situations. (ie, not protecting people,
>instead of fish.) How about the possibility of suing the federal
>government for taking too much of my income in the form of taxes?
>(ie, taking from me and giving it to a fish I don't necessarily
>care for.)
Steve,
FWIW, the basis for sueing the federal gov't (specifically, the Depts. of
Interior or Commerce) over endangered species listings (or lack thereof)
rests
on the perceived violation of law as defined in the formal language of the
Endangered Species Act. That law legally requires listing and protection for
endangered taxa. When protection is withheld or overlooked, i.e., when the
gov't
"breaks" or fails to adhere to its own law, the citizenry has a clear right
to
file suit in order to force adherence to the law. Your hypothetical
scenarios do
not not apply (as far as I can tell) since no law is being "broken" or bent
or
ignored.
The Bush administration proposal will effectively remove the private
citizen's
right to sue the gov't to abide by its own law.
Chris Scharpf
Baltimore
/---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- /"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily / reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes / Association" / This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association / nanfa_at_aquaria.net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word / subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to / nanfa-request_at_aquaria.net. For a digest version, send the command to / nanfa-digest-request_at_aquaria.net instead. / For more information about NANFA, visit our web page, http://www.nanfa.org/----------------------------------------------------------------------------- /"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily / reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes / Association" / This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association / nanfa_at_aquaria.net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word / subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to / nanfa-request_at_aquaria.net. For a digest version, send the command to / nanfa-digest-request_at_aquaria.net instead. / For more information about NANFA, visit our web page, http://www.nanfa.org