The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] on Friday concluded [opinion, PDF] that sound levels approved by the Obama administration violate the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). The MMPA prohibits [official website] people from harassing, feeding, hunting, capturing, collecting or killing any marine mammal or a part of a marine mammal. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) [official website] is a US federal agency that is in charge of managing the country’s living marine resources. The NMFS approved emissions in 2012 that the National Resource Defense Council (NRDC) [advocacy website] and other environmental groups alleged [RT report] violated the MMPA and filed suit. The appellate court ruled 3-0 that the approved emissions violated the MMPA, reversing and remanding to the district court for further proceedings.

The use of Sound Navigation and Ranging (SONAR) technology has been contested between its users and environmental groups for its ability to negatively impact marine life. In 2008 the US Supreme Court ruled [JURIST report] that the US Navy may continue using sonar as part of military training exercises, ruling against environmentalists’ concerns for the impact it would have on whales and other marine life. In the same year, Director of Urban Programs, Natural Resources Defense Council Joel Reynolds, argued [JURIST op-ed] that a sonar case highlighted federal courts’ equitable power to weigh competing interests. Also in 2008, counsel for the Pacific Legal Foundation Steven Gieseler and Reed Hopper argued [JURIST op-ed] that a Navy sonar case should balance protecting environment with other legitimate interests. By contrast, Staff Attorney at the NRDC Cara Horowitz argued [JURIST op-ed] that the Bush Administration was overreaching executive power by exempting the Navy from complying with the National Environmental Policy Act.