monsanto co et al geertson seed farms et argued april decided june plant protection act ppa provides secretary department agriculture may issue regulations prevent introduction plant pests dissemination plant pests within pursuant grant authority animal plant health inspection service aphis promulgated regulations presume genetically engineered plants plant pests thus regulated articles ppa aphis determines otherwise however person may petition aphis determination regulated article present plant pest risk therefore subject applicable regulations aphis may grant petition whole part determining whether grant nonregulated status genetically engineered plant variety aphis must comply national environmental policy act nepa requires federal agencies fullest extent possible prepare detailed environmental impact statement eis every major federal actio significantly affecting quality human environment agency need complete eis finds based shorter statement known environmental assessment ea proposed action significant environmental impact case involves challenge aphis decision approve unconditional deregulation roundup ready alfalfa rra variety alfalfa genetically engineered tolerate herbicide roundup petitioners owner licensee intellectual property rights rra response petitioners deregulation request aphis prepared draft ea solicited public comments proposed course action based ea comments submitted agency determined introduction rra significant adverse impact environment accordingly aphis decided deregulate rra unconditionally without preparing eis respondents conventional alfalfa growers environmental groups filed action challenging decision ground violated nepa federal laws district held inter alia aphis violated nepa deregulated rra without first completing detailed eis remedy violation vacated agency decision completely deregulating rra enjoined aphis deregulating rra whole part pending completion eis entered nationwide permanent injunction prohibiting almost future planting rra pendency eis process petitioners government appealed challenging scope relief granted disputing aphis deregulation decision violated nepa ninth circuit affirmed concluding among things district abused discretion rejecting aphis proposed mitigation measures favor broader injunction held respondents standing seek injunctive relief petitioners standing seek review ninth circuit judgment affirming entry relief pp petitioners constitutional standing seek review article iii standing requires injury concrete particularized actual imminent ii fairly traceable challenged action iii redressable favorable ruling see horne flores petitioners satisfy three criteria petitioners injured inability sell license rra prospective customers aphis completes eis injury caused remedial order petitioners challenge appeal redressed favorable ruling respondents nevertheless contend petitioners lack standing injury independently caused part district order petitioners failed challenge vacatur aphis deregulation decision argument fails two independent reasons first one main disputes parties throughout litigation whether district adopted aphis proposed judgment replaced vacated deregulation decision order expressly authorizing continued sale planting rra accordingly district adopted aphis proposed judgment still authority continued sale rra notwithstanding district vacatur effect new deregulation decision second petitioners case standing challenge part district order enjoining partial deregulation respondents focus argument part judgment enjoins planting judgment also granting deregulation petition even part agency must prepare eis part judgment inflicts injury also caused vacatur pp respondents constitutional standing seek injunctive relief complete deregulation order issue disagrees petitioners argument respondents failed show likely suffer constitutionally cognizable injury absent injunctive relief district found respondent farmers established reasonable probability conventional alfalfa crops infected engineered roundup ready gene rra completely deregulated substantial risk gene flow injures respondents several ways sufficiently concrete satisfy prong constitutional standing analysis moreover harms readily attributable aphis deregulation decision gives rise significant risk gene flow alfalfa varieties finally judicial order prohibiting planting deregulation genetically engineered alfalfa redress respondents injuries eliminating minimizing risk gene flow crops pp district abused discretion enjoining aphis effecting partial deregulation prohibiting planting rra pending agency completion detailed environmental review pp petitioners government argue otherwise assumes without deciding district acted lawfully vacating agency decision completely deregulate rra therefore addresses injunction prohibiting aphis deregulating rra pending completion eis nationwide injunction prohibiting almost rra planting pendency eis process may grant permanent injunction plaintiff must satisfy test demonstrating suffered irreparable injury remedies available law monetary damages inadequate compensate injury considering balance hardships plaintiff defendant remedy equity warranted public interest disserved permanent injunction ebay mercexchange test fully applies nepa cases see winter natural resources defense council thus existence nepa violation create presumption injunctive relief available granted absent unusual circumstances pp none four factors supports district order enjoining aphis partially deregulating rra pendency eis process importantly respondents show suffer irreparable injury aphis allowed proceed partial deregulation least two reasons first aphis pursues partial deregulation arguably runs afoul nepa respondents may file new suit challenging action seeking appropriate preliminary relief accordingly permanent injunction needed guard present imminent risk likely irreparable harm second partial deregulation need cause respondents injury scope sufficiently limited risk gene flow virtually nonexistent indeed broad injunction entered essentially procedure aphis determine independently pending eis process assessing effects complete deregulation limited deregulation pose appreciable risk environmental harm pp district also erred entering nationwide injunction planting rra two independent reasons first inappropriate district foreclose even possibility partial temporary deregulation follows inappropriate enjoin planting accordance deregulation decision second injunction drastic extraordinary remedy granted matter course see weinberger respondents concede less drastic remedy partial complete vacatur aphis deregulation decision sufficient redress injury recourse additional extraordinary relief injunction warranted pp given district errors need address whether injunctive relief kind available respondents record pp reversed remanded alito delivered opinion roberts scalia kennedy thomas ginsburg sotomayor joined stevens filed dissenting opinion breyer took part consideration decision case monsanto company et petitioners geertson seed farms et al writ certiorari appeals ninth circuit june justice alito delivered opinion case arises decision animal plant health inspection service aphis deregulate variety genetically engineered alfalfa district held aphis violated national environmental policy act nepa stat et issuing deregulation decision without first completing detailed assessment environmental consequences proposed course action remedy violation district vacated agency decision completely deregulating alfalfa variety question ordered aphis act deregulation petition whole part completed detailed environmental review enjoined almost future planting genetically engineered alfalfa pending completion review appeals affirmed district entry permanent injunctive relief main issue dispute concerns breadth relief reasons set forth reverse remand proceedings plant protection act ppa stat et provides secretary department agriculture usda may issue regulations prevent introduction plant pests dissemination plant pests within secretary delegated authority aphis division usda cfr acting pursuant delegation aphis promulgated regulations governing introduction organisms products altered produced genetic engineering plant pests believed plant pests see regulations certain genetically engineered plants presumed plant pests thus regulated articles ppa aphis determines otherwise see ibid see also app however person may petition aphis determination regulated article present plant pest risk therefore subject applicable regulations cfr aphis may grant petition whole part deciding whether grant nonregulated status genetically engineered plant variety aphis must comply nepa requires federal agencies fullest extent possible prepare environmental impact statement eis every recommendation report proposals legislation major federal actio significantly affecting quality human environment statutory text speaks solely terms proposed actions require agency consider possible environmental impacts less imminent actions preparing impact statement proposed actions kleppe sierra club agency need complete eis particular proposal finds basis shorter environmental assessment ea proposed action significant impact environment cfr even particular agency proposal requires eis applicable regulations allow agency take least action furtherance proposal eis prepared see action concerning proposal shall taken adverse environmental impact limit choice reasonable alternatives work required program environmental impact statement progress action covered existing program statement agencies shall undertake interim major federal action covered program may significantly affect quality human environment unless action satisfies certain requirements case involves roundup ready alfalfa rra kind alfalfa crop genetically engineered tolerant glyphosate active ingredient herbicide roundup petitioner monsanto company monsanto owns intellectual property rights rra monsanto licenses rights forage genetics international fgi exclusive developer rra seed aphis initially classified rra regulated article petitioners sought nonregulated status two strains rra response aphis prepared draft ea assessing likely environmental impact requested deregulation published notice federal register advising public deregulation petition soliciting public comments draft ea considering hundreds public comments received aphis issued finding significant impact decided deregulate rra unconditionally without preparing eis prior decision aphis authorized almost field trials rra conducted period eight years app approximately eight months aphis granted rra nonregulated status respondents two conventional alfalfa seed farms environmental groups concerned food safety filed action secretary agriculture certain officials federal district challenging aphis decision completely deregulate rra complaint alleged violations nepa endangered species act esa stat et ppa respondents seek preliminary injunctive relief pending resolution claims hence rra enjoyed nonregulated status approximately two years period farmers planted estimated acres rra app resolving respondents nepa claim district accepted aphis determination rra harmful health effects humans livestock app pet cert accord nevertheless district held aphis violated nepa deregulating rra without first preparing eis particular found aphis ea failed answer substantial questions concerning two broad consequences proposed action first extent complete deregulation lead transmission gene conferring glyphosate tolerance rra organic conventional alfalfa second extent introduction rra contribute development weeds light determination deregulation decision ran afoul nepa district dismissed without prejudice respondents claims esa ppa rulings district granted petitioners permission intervene remedial phase lawsuit asked parties submit proposed judgments embodying preferred means remedying nepa violation aphis proposed judgment ordered agency prepare eis vacated agency deregulation decision replaced decision terms judgment proposed judgment providing federal defendants june determination nonregulated status alfalfa genetically engineered tolerance herbicide glyphosate hereby vacated replaced terms judgment emphasis added terms proposed judgment turn permitted continued planting rra pending completion eis subject six restrictions restrictions included among things mandatory isolation distances rra alfalfa fields order mitigate risk gene flow mandatory harvesting conditions requirement planting harvesting equipment contact rra cleaned prior use conventional organic alfalfa identification handling requirements rra seed requirement rra seed producers hay growers contract either monsanto fgi contracts require compliance limitations set proposed judgment district rejected aphis proposed judgment preliminary injunction district prohibited almost future planting rra pending aphis completion required eis order minimize harm farmers relied aphis deregulation decision expressly allowed already purchased rra plant seeds march subsequently entered permanent injunction judgment vacated aphis deregulation decision ordered aphis prepare eis made decision monsanto deregulation petition enjoined planting rra march pending aphis completion required eis imposed certain conditions suggested aphis handling identification rra district denied petitioners request evidentiary hearing government monsanto fgi appealed challenging scope relief granted disputing existence nepa violation see geertson seed farms johanns divided panel appeals ninth circuit affirmed based review record panel first concluded district recognized injunction issue nepa violation found instead based issuance injunctive relief test traditionally used purpose panel held district committed clear error making subsidiary factual findings assessment four relevant factors based panel rejected claim district given sufficient deference aphis expertise concerning likely effects allowing continued planting rra limited basis panel view aphis proposed interim measures perpetuated system found district caused environmental harm past hence panel concluded district abused discretion choosing reject aphis proposed mitigation measures favor broader injunction prevent irreparable harm occurring ibid panel majority also rejected petitioners alternative argument district erred declining hold evidentiary hearing entering permanent injunction writing dissent judge randy smith disagreed conclusion view district required conduct evidentiary hearing issuing permanent injunction unless facts undisputed adverse party expressly waived right hearing neither two exceptions found applied granted certiorari ii threshold respondents contend petitioners lack standing seek review lower rulings issue disagree standing article iii constitution requires injury concrete particularized actual imminent fairly traceable challenged action redressable favorable ruling horne flores slip petitioners satisfy three criteria petitioners injured inability sell license rra prospective customers time aphis completes required eis injury caused remedial order petitioners challenge appeal redressed favorable ruling respondents dispute petitioners standing contest district permanent injunction order pursued different litigation strategy instead respondents argue injury petitioners complain independently caused part district order petitioners failed challenge namely vacatur aphis deregulation decision practical consequence vacatur respondents contend restore rra status regulated article subject certain exceptions applicable federal regulations ban growth sale regulated articles petitioners specifically challenge district vacatur respondents reason lack standing challenge part district order injunction cause petitioners injury also caused vacatur see brief respondents respondents argument fails two independent reasons first although petitioners challenge vacatur directly adequately preserved objection vacated deregulation decision replaced aphis proposed injunction throughout remedial phase litigation one main disputes parties whether district required adopt aphis proposed judgment see opening brief etc urging appeals vacate district judgment remand case district instructions enter aphis proposed relief opening brief federal etc pp blanket injunction narrowed accordance aphis proposal see also tr oral arg judgment replaced vacated deregulation decision order expressly allowing continued planting rra subject certain limited conditions app pet cert proposed judgment providing federal defendants june determination nonregulated status alfalfa genetically engineered tolerance herbicide glyphosate hereby vacated replaced terms judgment emphasis added accordingly district adopted agency suggested remedy still authority continued planting rra effect new deregulation second petitioners case standing challenge part district order enjoining partial deregulation respondents focus standing argument part judgment enjoining planting rra judgment also efore granting monsanto deregulation petition even part federal defendants shall prepare environmental impact statement emphasis added see also enter final judgment ordering government prepare eis makes decision monsanto deregulation petition respondents concede part judgment goes beyond vacatur aphis deregulation decision see tr oral arg oral argument respondents contended retriction aphis ability effect partial deregulation rra cause petitioners actual imminent harm order partial deregulation occur respondents argued case remanded agency aphis prepare ea may may come favor partial deregulation petitioners prove two events happen respondents contended asserted harm caused district partial deregulation ban speculative satisfy actual imminent injury requirement reject argument injunction lifted see district remand matter agency order aphis effect partial deregulation even remand required perceive basis district decline remand matter agency determine whether pursue partial deregulation pendency eis process doubt whether aphis issue new ea favor partial deregulation sufficient defeat petitioners standing undisputed petitioners submitted deregulation petition partial deregulation kind embodied agency proposed judgment afford petitioners much relief seek also undisputed absent district order aphis attempt effect partial deregulation pending completion eis see purposes resolving particular standing question us need decide whether extent party challenging injunction bars agency granting certain relief must show agency likely afford relief free case clear aphis proposed judgment briefing throughout remedial phase litigation agency takes view partial deregulation reflecting proposed limitations public interest thus strong likelihood aphis partially deregulate rra district injunction district elimination likelihood plainly sufficient establish constitutionally cognizable injury moreover respondents essentially conceded oral argument injury redressed favorable decision since vacating current injunction allow petitioners go back agency seek partial deregulation even district vacatur aphis deregulation decision left intact therefore hold petitioners standing seek next consider petitioners contention respondents lack standing seek injunctive relief see daimlerchrysler cuno plaintiff must demonstrate standing separately form relief sought internal quotation marks omitted petitioners argue respondents failed show named respondents likely suffer constitutionally cognizable injury absent injunctive relief see brief petitioners disagree respondents include conventional alfalfa farmers emphasizing undisputed concentration alfalfa seed farms district found farmers established probability organic conventional alfalfa crops infected engineered gene rra completely deregulated app pet cert substantial risk gene flow injures respondents several ways example respondents represent order continue marketing product consumers wish buy alfalfa respondents conduct testing find whether extent crops contaminated see record doc declaration phillip geertson support plantiffs motion summary judgment hereinafter geertson declaration due high potential contamination need test crops presence genetically engineered alfalfa seed testing new cost seed business raise seed prices cover costs making prices less competitive doc declaration patrick trask support plantiff motion summary judgment ensure seeds pure need test crops obtain certification seeds free genetically engineered alfalfa see also record doc zero tolerance contaminated seed organic market respondents also allege risk gene flow cause take certain measures minimize likelihood potential contamination ensure adequate supply alfalfa see geertson declaration noting increased cost alfalfa breeding due potential genetic contamination due threat contamination begun contracting growers outside ensure supply genetically pure conventional alfalfa seed finding new growers already resulted increased administrative costs seed business harms respondents suffer even crops actually infected roundup ready gene sufficiently concrete satisfy prong constitutional standing analysis harms readily attributable aphis deregulation decision district found gives rise significant risk gene flow varieties alfalfa finally judicial order prohibiting growth sale genetically engineered alfalfa remedy respondents injuries eliminating minimizing risk gene flow conventional organic alfalfa crops therefore conclude respondents constitutional standing seek injunctive relief complete deregulation order issue petitioners appear suggest respondents fail satisfy zone interests test previously articulated prudential standing requirement cases challenging agency compliance particular statutes see reply brief petitioners arguing protection risk commercial harm interest nepa enacted address bennett spear argument unpersuasive district found respondents injury environmental well economic component see app pet cert ruling merits respondents nepa claim district held risk rra gene conferring glyphosate resistance infect conventional organic alfalfa significant environmental effect within meaning nepa petitioners appeal part ruling occasion revisit respondents seek injunctive relief order avert risk gene flow crops effect district determined significant environmental concern purposes nepa mere fact respondents also seek avoid certain economic harms tied risk gene flow strip prudential standing short respondents standing seek injunctive relief petitioners standing seek review ninth circuit judgment affirming entry relief therefore proceed merits case iii district sought remedy aphis nepa violation three ways first vacated agency decision completely deregulating rra second enjoined aphis deregulating rra whole part pending completion mandated eis third entered nationwide injunction prohibiting almost future planting rra petitioners government argue otherwise assume without deciding district acted lawfully vacating deregulation decision see tr oral arg district vacated order entirety sent back agency accord therefore address latter two aspects district judgment however provide brief overview standard governing entry injunctive relief plaintiff seeking permanent injunction must satisfy test may grant relief plaintiff must demonstrate suffered irreparable injury remedies available law monetary damages inadequate compensate injury considering balance hardships plaintiff defendant remedy equity warranted public interest disserved permanent injunction ebay mercexchange traditional test applies plaintiff seeks permanent injunction remedy nepa violation see winter natural resources defense council slip petitioners argue lower courts case proceeded erroneous assumption injunction generally appropriate remedy nepa violation particular petitioners note district cited ninth circuit precedent proposition run mill nepa case injunction delaying contemplated government project proper nepa violation cured app pet cert quoting idaho watersheds project hahn see also app pet cert quoting language preliminary injunction order addition petitioners observe district appeals case stated unusual circumstances injunction may withheld likely limited scope nepa cases quoting national parks conservation assn babbitt internal quotation marks omitted insofar statements quoted intended guide determination whether grant injunctive relief invert proper mode analysis injunction issue traditional test satisfied see winter supra slip contrast statements quoted appear presume injunction proper remedy nepa violation except unusual circumstances thumb scales warranted contrary reasoning appeals error cured perfunctory recognition injunction automatically issue nepa cases see internal quotation marks omitted enough considering request injunctive relief ask whether good reason injunction issue rather must determine injunction issue traditional test set notwithstanding lower courts apparent reliance incorrect standard set circuit precedents quoted respondents argue lower courts fact applied traditional test view statements injunctive relief proper nepa case injunctions granted except unusual circumstances descriptive rather prescriptive see brief respondents need decide whether respondents characterization lower opinions case sound even injunctive relief granted stand first consider whether district erred enjoining aphis partially deregulating rra pendency eis relevant part district judgment efore granting monsanto deregulation petition even part federal defendants shall prepare environmental impact statement app pet cert emphasis added see also enter final judgment ordering government prepare eis makes decision monsanto deregulation petition plain text order prohibits partial deregulation particular partial deregulation embodied aphis proposed judgment think quite clear district meant said related injunction planting rra may planted ntil federal defendants prepare eis decide deregulation petition emphasis added injunction appears judgment directly follows injunction granting monsanto petition even part carve exception planting subsequently authorized valid partial deregulation decision view none traditional four factors governing entry permanent injunctive relief supports district injunction prohibiting partial deregulation see helpful understand injunction prohibiting partial deregulation fits broader dispute parties respondents case brought suit apa challenge particular agency order aphis decision completely deregulate rra district held order question procedurally defective aphis decided appeal determination point agency decide whether extent pursue partial deregulation agency found basis new ea limited temporary deregulation satisfied applicable statutory regulatory requirements proceed deregulation even yet finished onerous eis required complete deregulation agency issue partial deregulation order party aggrieved order bring separate suit administrative procedure act challenge particular deregulation attempted see case aphis apparently sought streamline proceedings asking district craft remedy effect partially deregulated rra time agency finalized eis needed complete deregulation see tr oral arg app pet cert justify disposition aphis petitioners submitted voluminous documentary submissions purported show risk gene flow insignificant district allowed limited planting harvesting subject aphis proposed conditions respondents turn submitted considerable evidence seemed cut way put district unenviable position parties experts disagreed virtually every factual issue relating possible environmental harm including likelihood genetic contamination contamination already occurred district may well acted within discretion refusing craft judicial remedy authorized continued planting harvesting rra eis prepared follow however district within rights enjoining aphis allowing planting harvesting pursuant authority vested agency law district entered permanent injunction aphis yet exercised authority partially deregulate rra aphis actually seeks effect partial deregulation judicial review decision district injunction justified prophylactic measure needed guard possibility agency seek effect particular partial deregulation scheme embodied terms aphis proposed judgment even district required adopt judgment need stop agency effecting partial deregulation accordance procedures established law moreover terms district injunction enjoin particular partial deregulation embodied aphis proposed judgment instead district barred agency pursuing deregulation matter limited geographic area planting rra allowed great isolation distances mandated rra fields fields growing alfalfa stringent regulations governing harvesting distribution robust enforcement mechanisms available time decision consequently matter small risk planting authorized conditions adversely affect environment general respondents particular order enjoining partial deregulation also inconsistent aspects judgment fashioning remedy nepa violation district steered middle course extreme options either end see one hand district rejected aphis proposal supported petitioners allow continued planting harvesting rra subject agency proposed limitations hand district bar continued planting rra regulated article permit aphis see app pet cert expressly allowed farmers harvest sell rra planted march district right conclude partial deregulation matter limited required preparation eis hard see limited planting harvesting district allowed also require preparation eis conversely district right conclude limited planting harvesting allowed require preparation eis appropriately limited partial deregulation likewise possible based analysis set forth clear order enjoining deregulation whatsoever satisfy traditional test granting permanent injunctive relief importantly respondents show suffer irreparable injury aphis allowed proceed partial deregulation least two independent reasons first aphis pursues partial deregulation arguably runs afoul nepa respondents may file new suit challenging action seeking appropriate preliminary relief see accordingly permanent injunction needed guard present imminent risk likely irreparable harm second partial deregulation need cause respondents injury much less irreparable injury scope partial deregulation sufficiently limited risk gene flow crops virtually nonexistent example suppose aphis deregulates rra remote part country respondents neither grow intend grow alfalfa conventional alfalfa farms currently located suppose aphis issues accompanying administrative order mandating isolation distances great eliminate appreciable risk gene flow crops conventional farmers might someday choose plant surrounding area see brief opposition quoting study concluding order zero tolerance gene flow rra seed field conventional seed field fields isolation distance see also tr oral arg representation solicitor general aphis may impose conditions deregulation rra via issuance administrative order finally suppose aphis concludes new ea limited deregulation pose significant risk gene flow harmful weed development agency adopts plan police vigorously compliance administrative order limited geographic area question hard see respondents show limited deregulation cause likely irreparable injury respondents case represent class seek enjoin order ground might cause harm parties case district order prohibiting partial deregulation improperly relieves respondents burden make requisite evidentiary course aphis might ultimately choose partially deregulate rra pendency eis else pursue kind partial deregulation embodied proposed judgment rather limited deregulation envisioned hypothetical time agency decides whether exercise regulatory authority however courts cause intervene indeed broad injunction entered essentially procedure agency determine independently pending eis process assessing effects complete deregulation limited deregulation pose appreciable risk environmental harm see cfr sum know whether extent aphis seek effect limited deregulation pendency eis process free know vacatur aphis deregulation decision means virtually rra grown sold time new deregulation decision place also know party aggrieved hypothetical future deregulation decision ample opportunity challenge seek appropriate preliminary relief decision made light particular circumstances hold district properly exercise discretion enjoining partial deregulation kind pending aphis preparation eis follows appeals erred affirming aspect district judgment turn petitioners claim district erred entering nationwide injunction planting rra petitioners argue district apply right test determining whether enter permanent injunctive relief even district identified operative legal standard erred matter law applying standard facts case district required grant petitioners evidentiary hearing resolve contested issues fact germane remedial dispute parties agree district injunction planting went far come conclusion two independent reasons first impropriety district broad injunction planting flows impropriety injunction partial deregulation aphis may partially deregulate rra preparing eis question need decide farmers able grow sell rra accordance agency determination inappropriate district foreclose even possibility partial temporary deregulation necessarily follows likewise inappropriate enjoin parties acting accordance terms deregulation decision second respondents represented district injunction planting meaningful practical effect independent vacatur see brief respondents see also tr oral arg mistake made district appreciating vacatur effect independently prohibiting growth sale almost rra injunction drastic extraordinary remedy granted matter course see weinberger less drastic remedy partial complete vacatur aphis deregulation decision sufficient redress respondents injury recourse additional extraordinary relief injunction warranted see ibid see also winter slip sum district abused discretion enjoining aphis effecting partial deregulation prohibiting possibility planting accordance terms deregulation given errors need express view whether injunctive relief kind available respondents record us address question whether district required conduct evidentiary hearing entering relief issue judgment ninth circuit reversed case remanded proceedings consistent opinion ordered justice breyer took part consideration decision case monsanto company et petitioners geertson seed farms et al writ certiorari appeals ninth circuit june justice stevens dissenting dispute district critical findings fact first roundup ready alfalfa rra contaminate plants see app pet cert second even planting controlled setting led contamination instances see third animal plant health inspection service aphis limited ability monitor enforce limitations planting see fourth genetic contamination rra decimate farmers livelihoods american alfalfa market years come see see also instead majority faults district enjoining aphis partially deregulating rra ante view district may actually ordered relief readily assume regardless district abuse discretion considering voluminous record making aforementioned findings issued order us understand district judgment necessary understand background litigation petitioner monsanto company monsanto large corporation long produced weed killer called roundup years experimentation monsanto forage genetics international fgi genetically engineered mutation alfalfa genome makes plant immune roundup monsanto fgi new product rra first crop engineered resist herbicide transmit genetically engineered gene plants see app pet cert midst deregulatory trend agricultural sector petitioners asked aphis deregulate rra thereby allowing sold planted nationwide app rather conducting detailed analysis preparing environmental impact statement eis required national environmental policy act nepa every major federal actio significantly affecting quality human environment aphis merely conducted abbreviated environmental assessment ea period aphis allowed public comment ea agency received comments opposed deregulation app pet cert farmers scientists opined rra contaminate alfalfa genetically modified destroying american export market alfalfa potentially contaminating plants breeding new type weed despite substantial evidence rra genes transfer plants aphis issued finding significant impact agreed deregulate rra unconditionally ante eis wait regulation blocking path petitioners began selling rra farmers environmental groups swiftly brought lawsuit challenge aphis decision deregulate raising claims nepa statutes district carefully reviewed long record found aphis reasons concluding risks genetic contamination low app pet cert review aphis internal documents showed individuals within agency warned contamination might occur aphis rested decision deregulate assertion contamination risk significant organic conventional farmers responsibility protect environment ibid yet agency drew conclusion without investigated whether farmers fact protect crops contamination ibid district likewise found aphis reasons disregarding risk weeds speculative convincing agency merely explained weeds acquire roundup resistance farmers use lternative herbicides ibid light acknowledged risk rra gene transmission potential impact development roundup resistant weeds concluded significant possibility serious environmental harm granted summary judgment plaintiffs see also point question remedy arose parties submitted proposed final judgments several corporations interest rra including monsanto sought permission intervene district granted motion agreed give opportunity present evidence assist fashioning appropriate scope whatever relief granted internal quotation marks omitted district considered proposed judgments issued preliminary injunction ordinarily explained remedy failure conduct eis vacate permit unlawfully given result case prohibit use rra see see also case presented special difficulty following aphis unlawful deregulation order farmers begun planting genetically modified rra preliminary injunction district ordered new rra planted aphis completed eis determined relief appropriate protect farmers declined prohibit harvesting using selling crops already planted minimize harm growers intend imminently plant roundup ready alfalfa permitted hose growers intend plant rra next three weeks already purchased seed go ahead plant emphasis deleted essentially grandfathered farmers relied good faith aphis actions determining scope final judgment district invited parties intervenors submit whatever additional evidence wish ed provide scheduled additional oral argument parties submitted competing proposals permanent injunctive relief plaintiffs requested one even farmers allowed plant grow harvest rra full eis prepared aphis intervenors instead sought remedy facilitat continued dramatic growth rra partial deregulation order permit planting subject certain conditions specified minimum distances rra conventional alfalfa special cleaning requirements equipment used genetically modified crop see adopted compromise first declined adopt proposal aphis acknowledged gene transmission occurred rra result development weeds light substantial record evidence risks agree nationwide planting scheme without benefit development relevant data well public comment whether contamination controlled partial deregulation proposed petitioners noted really deregulation certain conditions reasons given earlier order requires eis ibid pointed numerous problems proposal neither aphis monsanto provided evidence suggests whether extent proposed interim conditions actually followed comparable conditions failed prevent contamination certain limited settings aphis moreover conceded resources inspect rra already planted possibly expected adequately monitor one million acres rra intervenors estimate planted proposal ibid especially problematic plan limit contamination depended rules harvesting farmers unlikely follow rules aphis ha still made inquiry numerous factual concerns raised summary judgment order issued several months earlier next rejected plaintiffs proposed remedy enjoin ing harvesting sale already planted rra although planting harvesting rra poses contamination risk reasoned equities different farmers already invested time money planting rra reliance aphis deregulation order small amounts harvesting easily monitored rather force farmers tear crops imposed variety conditions crops handling distribution rra however sided plaintiffs enjoined planting pendency eis balancing equities explained risk harm great ontamination undone destroy crops farmers sell genetically modified alfalfa crops replanted two four years loss even greater ibid side balance recognized farmers may wish switch genetically modified alfalfa immediately companies like monsanto want start selling fast noted rra small percentage companies overall business unsold seed stored companies cause claim loss anticipated revenue aware plaintiffs lawsuit nonetheless chose market rra thus district stated vacat june deregulation decision enjoi planting rra march date decision pending government completion eis decision deregulation petition impose conditions handling identification rra day issued judgment relevant part judgment federal defendants june determination nonregulated status rra vacated granting monsanto deregulation petition even part federal defendants shall prepare eis federal defendants prepare eis decide deregulation petition rra may planted rra already planted march may grown harvested sold subject following conditions ii proceeding address opinion terms important note reservations validity terms today rests bulk analysis also primary basis jurisdiction premise district enjoined aphis partially deregulating rra sense see ante permissible necessarily correct reading district judgment far tell petitioners reply brief neither petitioners government submitted us district exceeded authority manner indeed government raised issue petitioners raise issue three questions presented body petition writ certiorari raise issue opening briefs respondents alleged monsanto injury redressed vacating injunction insofar rra still regulated article petitioners bring issue attention explaining redressable injury petitioners alleged district order prevents aphis implement ing interim solution allowing continued planting reply brief petitioners aphis party says wrongly barred pursuing deregulation even accordance procedures established law ante complain aspect district order even reply brief thus notwithstanding petitioners adequately preserved objection vacated deregulation decision replaced aphis proposed injunction ante emphasis added key legal premise decides case never adequately presented course standard sound judicial practice see kumho tire carmichael stevens concurring part dissenting part today decision illustrates quite unclear whether premise correct put position deciding legal issues without aid briefing view district judgment fairly read address total deregulation orders kind spawned lawsuit particular partial deregulation order proposed aphis interpretation judgment consistent district accompanying opinion concluded stating enter final judgment ordering government prepare eis makes decision monsanto deregulation petition app pet cert language opinion appear ba agency pursuing deregulation matter limited ante emphasis deleted interpretation also consistent aphis decision contest according unprecedented infringement agency statutory authority sure district judgment somewhat opaque troubling may asserting jurisdiction deciding highly factbound case based nothing misunderstanding also troubling may making law without adequate briefing critical questions passing upon surprised remand district merely clarified order iii even assuming majority correctly interpreted district judgment agree reverse district outset important observe district faced unlawful agency action set parties relied action prayer relief avoid irreparable harm operating powers equity case function equity mould decree necessities particular case hecht bowles flexibility practicality touchtones remedial determinations public interest private needs competing private claims must weighed reconciled background limitations particular familiarity case district takes equitable role adjusting legal obligations review remedy crafts abuse discretion eference explained hallmark review general elec joiner although equitable remedies left trial left albemarle paper moody quoting burr cas cc marshall principles set forth applicable federal statutes may inform judgment see oakland cannabis buyers cooperative sitting equity ignore judgment congress deliberately expressed legislation internal quotation marks omitted historically courts particularly broad equitable power thus particularly broad discretion remedy public nuisances upon public rights properties mugler kansas include environmental view district unreasonably exercis discretion bennett bennett even categorically prohibit partial deregulation pending completion eis rather district judgment understood either two reasonable exercises equitable powers equitable application administrative law first district decision understood equitable application administrative law faced two different deregulation proposals district appears vacated deregulation already occurred made clear nepa requires eis future deregulation rra partially stayed vacatur extent affects farmers already planted nepa agency must prepare eis every major federal actio significantly affecting quality human environment recall district found basis substantial evidence planting rra cause genetic contamination crops planting controlled settings led contamination aphis unable monitor enforce limitations planting genetic contamination decimate american alfalfa market light evidence may well concluded deregulation rra even limited geographic area stringent regulations governing harvesting distribution ante requires eis nepa see generally mandelker nepa law litigation ed describing eis required cf marsh oregon natural resources council nepa embodies sweeping commitment environmental safety principle agency act incomplete information regret decision late correct indeed appears deregulation genetically modified crop transfer genes organisms effectively monitored easily fits criteria eis especially case environmental threat novel see winter natural resources defense council slip eis important party conducting new type activity completely unknown effects environment moreover given aphis already ordered conduct eis deregulation rra reasonably feared partial deregulation undermine agency eventual decision courts confronted nepa violations regularly adopt interim measures maintain status quo particularly allowing agency action go forward risks foreclosing alternative courses action agency might adopted following completion eis see mandelker nepa law litigation applicable regulations district owed provide preparation eis action concerning agency proposal shall taken ave adverse environmental impact imit choice reasonable alternatives cfr exemplified problem farmers already purchased planted rra prior district judgment even minimal deregulation limit future regulatory options courts must remember many cases allowing agency proceed makes mockery eis process converting analysis rationalization herrmann injunctions nepa violations balancing equities chi rev see also see cfr eis implemented manner assuring used rationalize justify decisions already made although majority dispute district reasonably concluded nepa requires eis even partial deregulation rra suggests conclusion incompatible decision permit limited harvesting farmers already planted rra see ante see inconsisten cy ibid nepa apply actions federal courts see cfr exercising equitable discretion balance interests parties public district well within rights find nepa requires eis agency grants monsanto deregulation petition even part app pet cert yet also find partial stay vacatur appropriate protect interests farmers already acted reliance aphis similarly agree district ruling premature aphis yet effected partial deregulations ante although agency decide whether extent pursue deregulation ante application nepa aphis regulation rra might controlled deregulation pendency eis petitioners aphis already come back proposed partial deregulation order explained incompatible determination substantial risk gene spreading aphis lacks monitoring capacity concern apply partial deregulation order therefore good reason make clear upfront parties continue expend resources proposing orders instead moving ahead eis cf railroad tex pullman resources equity equal adjustment avoid waste tentative decision indeed aphis sought process ante injunctive relief second district judgment understood reasonable response nature risks posed rra separate apart nepa requirement eis risks sufficiently serious view injunction permissible exercise equitable authority district found gene transfer occur spread open land environmental economic consequences devastating cf amoco production gambell environmental injury nature seldom adequately remedied money damages often permanent least long duration irreparable although mere possibility future nuisance support injunction courts never required proof nuisance occur rather sufficient risk happening greater reasonable man incur pomeroy treatise equity jurisprudence equitable remedies ed gene transfer occurred american fields difficult impossible reverse harm hollingsworth perry per curiam slip additional considerations support district judgment clear aphis limited capacity monitor planted rra rra already planted marginal threat posed additional planting therefore significant injunctive remedies meant achieve nice adjustment reconciliation competing claims injury mould ing decree necessities case weinberger internal quotation marks omitted circumstances unreasonable conclude equitable solution allocate limited amount potentially safe rra farmers already planted suggests injunction nonetheless sweeping partial deregulation need cause respondents injury scope partial deregulation sufficiently limited risk gene flow crops virtually nonexistent ante appears reach conclusion citing one particular study voluminous record rather findings even assuming study correct ignores district findings gene flow likely aphis little ability monitor conditions imposed partial deregulation limits planting harvesting may operate fine laboratory setting district concluded many limits followed enforced real background perfectly reasonable wait eis aphis petitioners argued district partial deregulation safely implemented submitted evidence intended show planting restrictions prevent spread newly engineered gene contested virtually every factual issue relating possible environmental harm geertson seed farms johanns lacking benefit development relevant data app pet cert district find aphis petitioners assertions convincing say found otherwise reasonable conclude planting go forward complete study presented eis showed known problem gene flow reality district decision study needed assess whether limits deregulation prevent environmental damage reinforced statutory context issue arose equitable discretion must guided recognized defined public policy meredith winter see also hecht bowles explaining evaluates agency decision background federal statute discretion must exercised light large objectives act congress recognized nepa complex environmental cases often require exceptionally sophisticated scientific determinations agency decisions made basis incomplete information marsh oregon natural resources council congress also recognized agencies fully weigh consequences decisions without obtaining public comments eis see robertson methow valley citizens council may presume nepa violation requires injunction may take account principles embodied statute considering whether injunction appropriate district strong evidence gene transmission likely occur limits growing enforced also large amount highly detailed evidence whether growing restrictions even enforced prevent transmission evidence called question agency claims regarding risks posed partial deregulation enjoining partial deregulation benefit eis help parse evidence acted exactly sort caution congress endorsed nepa finally bears mention district experience case may given grounds skepticism representations made aphis petitioners sometimes one judicial actor better positioned another decide issue question miller fenton district may insights conveyed record pierce underwood case agency attempted deregulate rra without eis spite ample evidence potential environmental harms made clear agency violated nepa agency responded seeking process ante submitting deregulation proposal monsanto suffered legal empirical holes initial plan deregulate background may felt especially prudent wait eis concluding aphis manage rra threat environment district case put unenviable position ibid front strong evidence rra poses serious threat environment american business limits rra deregulation might followed enforced even newly engineered gene might nevertheless spread crops confronted disconcerting submissions aphis unlawful deregulation decision group farmers staked livelihoods aphis decision federal statute prizes informed decisionmaking matters seriously affect environment best view district well within discretion order remedy reverses accordingly respectfully dissent footnotes need decide whether district authority replace vacated agency order injunction making question whether petitioners entitled relief seek goes merits standing rest primary basis jurisdiction premise district enjoined aphis partially deregulating rra sense see post stevens dissenting even district order prohibiting partial deregulation applies particular partial deregulation order proposed aphis see post petitioners still standing challenge aspect order least one respondents case specifically alleges owns alfalfa farm prominent region faces significant risk contamination rra see record doc pp declaration phillip geertson support plantiffs motion summary judgment since alfalfa pollinated honey bumble leafcutter bees genetic contamination roundup ready seed rapidly spread seed growing regions bees range least two ten miles alfalfa seed farms much concentrated declarations record provide support district conclusion deregulation rra poses significant risk contamination respondents crops see doc declaration jim munsch alleging risk significant contamination due compact geographic area prime alfalfa seed producing areas fact pollen distributed bees large natural range activity app declaration marc asumendi roundup alfalfa seed fields currently planted major alfalfa seed production areas little regard contamination seed production fields petitioners focus challenge part district order prohibiting planting rra explain however broad injunction planting valid injunction partial deregulation improper see infra see also app pet cert district order recognizing aphis proposed remedy seek effect partial deregulation permits continued expansion roundup ready alfalfa market subject certain conditions emphasis added validity injunction prohibiting partial deregulation therefore properly us like district use term partial deregulation refer limited conditional deregulation see nepa provides eis must include every recommendation report proposals legislation major federal actions significantly affecting quality human environment emphasis added see also kleppe sierra club authority depart statutory language determine point germination process potential proposal impact statement prepared first emphasis added particular agency proposal exists requires preparation eis nepa regulations allow agency take least action pertaining proposal pendency eis process see cfr express view government contention limited deregulation kind embodied proposed judgment require prior preparation eis see brief federal respondents citing tr oral arg proposing interim allowing continued planting subject various protective measures fundamentally different action eis prepared aphis yet invoked procedures necessary attempt limited deregulation judicial consideration issues warranted time district appears recognized broad injunction may necessary avert injury respondents see app pet cert complicate try particular remedy simpler remedy attractive point view appears enforcement easier understanding easier may blunt instrument may actually short term achieve result achieve purpose even maybe overachieves maybe lot necessary know emphasis added see also ibid say greater miles away bees dah dah dah farm business even going get isolation distances footnotes see also ante district barred agency pursuing deregulation matter limited geographic area planting rra allowed great isolation distances mandated rra fields fields growing alfalfa stringent regulations governing harvesting distribution robust enforcement mechanisms available time decision consequently matter small risk planting authorized conditions adversely affect environment general respondents particular emphasis deleted see also railroad tex pullman history equity jurisdiction history regard public consequences many variegated applications supple principle situations brought play seymour freer wall equity ha unquestionable authority apply flexible comprehensive jurisdiction manner might necessary right administration justice parties indeed ground jurisdiction ability give complete perfect remedy story equity jurisprudence bigelow ed ed see steelworkers per curiam reviewing history injunctions prevent public nuisances see georgia tennessee copper air pollution arizona copper gillespie water pollution see reply brief federal respondents ongoing debate role equitable adjustments administrative law see levin vacation sea judicial remedies equitable discretion administrative law duke parties appeal majority assume district remedy crafted equity powers one many matters briefed case limited partial deregulation clear whether sort extremely limited partial deregulations envisioned see ante rra deregulated one small geographic area pursuant stringent restrictions achieved partial deregulation actions whether also exclusively achieved permit process applicable regulations regulated article may still used subject permitting process see cfr permits prescribe confinement conditions standard operating procedures maintain confinement genetically engineered organism introduction organisms products altered produced genetic engineering fed reg hereinafter introduction ordinarily nce article deregulated aphis place restrictions requirements use aphis never granted partial approval petition nonregulated status usda introduction genetically engineered organisms draft environmental impact statement july online http visited june available clerk case file aphis began contemplating new system allow release use genetically modified organisms special cases risks mitigated conditions ensure safe commercial use introduction emphasis added see cfr determination whether eis required turns irect effects ndirect effects include resulting actions may beneficial detrimental effects even balance agency believes effect beneficial determination whether eis required turns degree effects quality human environment likely highly controversial determination whether eis required turns degree possible effects quality human environment highly uncertain involve unique unknown risks posits hypothetical aphis deregulates rra limited remote area alfalfa grown issues accompanying order mandating isolation distances great eliminate appreciable risk gene flow crops conventional farmers might someday choose plant surrounding area ante outset important note difference plausible hypothetical piece fiction least aphis never granted partial approval petition nonregulated status see supra doubt choose deregulate genetically modified alfalfa place growing conditions sales networks product poor farmer already plants moreover notion imagined deregulation pose virtually environmental risk ignores one district critical findings fact aphis limited capacity monitor restrictions agency place manner constraints deregulation orders effect unless enforced see marsh oregon natural resources council order permitted harvesting planting final judgment permitted sale harvesting rra planted march month judgment see app pet cert see also explained previously see broad injunction inconsistent ante decision farmers already planted rra harvest crop equities different farmers relied agency companies like monstanto developed organism knowing might regulated aphis monitor limited amount rra also hypothesizes set growing conditions isolate rra plaintiffs case even farmers see ante already explained hypotheticals rather unrealistic see supra given plaintiffs include environmental organizations well farmer consumer associations hard see aphis carefully isolate protect interests event aphis concedes monitor limits rules protect parties may merely hortatory practice moreover although squarely addressed issue view general requirement injunction affect parties suit bresgal brock limit injunction federal agency named plaintiffs encourage numerous regulated entities file additional lawsuits federal jurisdictions livestock marketing assn dept agriculture supp sd aff majority notes district acknowledged hearing several months issued judgment simple slightly overinclusive remedy may preferable elaborate set planting conditions see ante quite right district said aphis lawyer hearing agency issues elaborate set precautions know even start enforce app pet cert suspect aphis petitioners come back convincing evidence prior completing eis moved modify order done indeed district showed willingness recalibrate order amended judgment months judgment issuance light aphis submission certain requirements impractical see app pet cert accordingly nepa mandate particular results mandate particular process embodies principle federal agencies carefully conside detailed information incurring potential environmental harm robertson