Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill

Court cases

437 U.S. 153 (1978)

Issue 1. Given the presence of an endangered species that would be destroyed by completion of a hydropower project, would completion of the project violate the ESA?
Holding. The ESA prohibits all government actions that eradicate a species or destroy its critical habitat.

Issue 2. Did the appropriations committee’s continued funding of the project constitute a repeal by implication of the ESA as applied to the Tellico Dam?
Holding. Expressions of committees dealing with requests for appropriations cannot be equated with statutes enacted by Congress and cannot repeal an act of Congress by implication.

Issue 3. If a project’s construction is likely to result in extinction of a species, is an injunction the only appropriate remedy?
Holding. Completion and operation of the dam was irreconcilable with the ESA and the clear Congressional mandate was an injunction.

Contributed by:

Hydropower Reform Coalition

 

View PDF

Related resource

Court cases

Bangor Hydro-Electric Company v. FERC

Issue. Was FERC or the prescriptive agency the proper party in a § 18 fishway dispute?

See all resources