OHIO CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE ENERGY, INC. v. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Et Al.
Headline: An Ohio citizens’ group asked a Justice to halt full-power operation of the Perry Nuclear plant, but the Justice denied the emergency stay, saying the statute covers only final orders and injunction standards were unmet.
Holding:
- Allows Perry Nuclear Plant to continue full-power operation for now.
- Confirms emergency stays under the statute cover only final court orders.
- Makes clear original injunctions need extraordinary justification and were not requested here.
Summary
Background
An Ohio citizens’ group sought an emergency order from Justice Scalia, acting as Circuit Justice for the Sixth Circuit, to stop full-power operation of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant near Cleveland. The group asked that the Sixth Circuit’s mandate be stayed while it continued its lawsuit against the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and while it pursued further review in this Court. The Sixth Circuit had lifted an earlier operating stay on December 23, 1986, after first imposing a stay on November 13, 1986.
Reasoning
The central question was whether the Justice could use the statutory stay provision, 28 U.S.C. §2101(f), to block the plant’s operation. The Justice explained that that statute applies only to execution or enforcement of final court orders, not to interim or interlocutory orders. To get the specific relief sought — stopping plant operations now — the group would have needed an original injunction under the All Writs Act and Court rules. Those injunctive powers are extraordinary, are used only in the most critical circumstances, require “indisputably clear” legal rights, and must be necessary to protect the Court’s authority. Because counsel did not specifically request such an original injunction or address its special requirements, the Justice would not consider granting that extraordinary relief.
Real world impact
The application for a stay was denied, so the plant may continue full-power operation for now. The denial rests on the limited reach of the statutory stay and on the high standards required for an original injunction, not on a final decision on the underlying lawsuit.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?