Description: Challenge to allocation of annual quota for summer flounder.
-
New York v. Raimondo
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 03/29/2022 Opinion and Order Download Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment denied and defendants' motion for summary judgment granted. New York Federal Court Upheld Summer Flounder Fishery Allocation Rule. The federal district court for the Southern District of New York rejected New York State’s challenge to a 2020 allocation rule for the summer flounder fishery. The court found that the allocation rule was consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and not arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law. The court described as “without merit” New York’s argument that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) ignored data that showed northward shift in the fishery (allegedly due to factors that included warming ocean waters). The court found that NMFS did consider the shift and properly weighed that fact against other considerations when adopting the 2020 allocation rule. 04/30/2021 Reply Download Reply memorandum of law filed by defendants in further support of cross-motion for summary judgment. 04/16/2021 Memorandum of Law Download Memorandum of law filed in opposition to Commerce's motion for summary judgment, and in reply to Commerce's opposition to New York's motion for summary judgment. 04/02/2021 Memorandum of Law Download Memorandum of law filed by defendants in opposition to plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and in support of defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment. 03/12/2021 Memorandum of Law Download Memorandum of law filed by New York in support of motion for summary judgment. 01/13/2021 Complaint Download Complaint filed. New York Challenged Summer Flounder Allocation Allegedly Based on “Obsolete” Data. The State of New York and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (New York) filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the Southern District of New York alleging that the federal defendants’ rules allocating the annual quota for summer flounder and applying the allocation to the 2021 season were arbitrary, capricious, and not in accordance with law. New York contended that the allocation rules were “based on obsolete 1980s data reflecting a summer flounder fishery that no longer exists” because the “center of biomass of the summer flounder stock as shifted northeast,” which researchers believe is due in part to ocean warming. New York asserts that the allocation rules discriminate against New York residents and allocates fishing privileges in an unfair and inequitable manner and is, for that reason and other reasons, inconsistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act.