Laserfiche WebLink
challenges. On appeal, however, the Tenth Circuit held that the Forest Service's promulgation of <br />the North Fork Exception violated NEPA and remanded to the District Court with instructions to <br />vacate the North Fork Exception in its entirety. High Country II, 951 F.3d at 1229. On June 15, <br />2020, the District Court entered an order formally vacating the North Fork Exception. Exhibit B. <br />II. Legal Background. <br />The Tenth Circuit's March 2, 2020 decision specifically ordered the vacatur of the entire <br />North Fork Exception, rendering the Exception void. High Country II, 951 F.3d at 1229. Black's <br />Law Dictionary defines "vacate" as "[t]o nullify or cancel; make void; invalidate." Black's Law <br />Dictionary (11th ed. 2019); see also Prometheus Radio Project v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 824 <br />F.3d 33, 52 (3d Cir. 2016) (Vacatur "wipe[s] the slate clean.").' Federal case law further <br />provides that vacatur of unlawful agency action renders that action a nullity, and there is a return <br />to the status quo—federal appellate orders "must be given full retroactive effect ... as to all <br />events, regardless of whether such events predate or postdate [the court's] announcement of the <br />rule." Harper v. Virginia Dep't of Taxation, 509 U.S. 86, 97 (1995); see, e.g., High Country I, 67 <br />F. Supp. 3d at 1265 (recognizing the point of vacatur in a NEPA case is to provide a "clean <br />slate"); Action on Smoking & Health v. C.A.B., 713 F.2d 795, 797 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (holding that <br />vacatur "had the effect of reinstating the rules previously in force"); Envd. Def. v Leavitt, 329 F. <br />Supp. 2d 55, 64 (D.D.C. 2004) ("When a court vacates an agency's rules, the vacatur restores the <br />status quo before the invalid rule took effect."). In other words, the agency action lacks any legal <br />significance and is treated as if it never happened. <br />The Tenth Circuit vacated the entire North Fork Exception knowing that Mountain Coal <br />believes that such a remedy would preclude mining activity at least until the agencies cured the <br />NEPA defects. Mountain Coal's counsel, under a duty of candor to the Tenth Circuit, argued that <br />vacating the entire North Fork Exception would bar the West Elk mine from undertaking coal <br />mining or road building in the area: <br />As is likely hoped by the Conservation Groups, vacatur of the entire North Fork <br />Exception would again freeze coal exploration in the entire North Fork Coal Mining <br />Exception Area and prevent Mountain Coal from further roadbuilding and mining <br />in the Lease Modifications. This would certainly result in bypass of the coal in the <br />Lease Modifications. <br />Br. of Intervenor -Appellee, App. Ct. ECF No. 25 at 49 (excerpt attached as Exhibit E). But the <br />Court squarely rejected Mountain Coal's request that the Court not vacate, holding that the <br />"appropriate remedy [was] vacatur of the entire North Fork Exception." 951 F.3d at 1229. Thus, <br />the Tenth Circuit understood that its direction to vacate the North Fork Exception would <br />' See also Black's Law Dictionary 1388 (Spec. Deluxe 5th ed. 1979) (defining "vacate" as "To annul; to set aside; to <br />cancel or rescind. To render an act void; as, to vacate an entry of record, or a judgment."). <br />