The hurdles litigants have encountered when it comes to the Endangered Species Act

by | Mar 6, 2025 | Essays

 

 

Explain some of the hurdles litigants have encountered when it comes to the Endangered Species Act and standing to bring a lawsuit.Question II – A contract is made between two parties. The terms of the contract are complete and unambiguous. A dispute arises between the Parties. Party A wants to pull out of the contract without penalty. Party B argues that Party A’s proposed action is prohibited by the express terms of the contract. Party A argues that the Parties verbally agreed to ignore that provision of the contract that would impose a penalty on Party A. Which Party will prevail and why?

 

Sample solution

Dante Alighieri played a critical role in the literature world through his poem Divine Comedy that was written in the 14th century. The poem contains Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. The Inferno is a description of the nine circles of torment that are found on the earth. It depicts the realms of the people that have gone against the spiritual values and who, instead, have chosen bestial appetite, violence, or fraud and malice. The nine circles of hell are limbo, lust, gluttony, greed and wrath. Others are heresy, violence, fraud, and treachery. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Dante’s Inferno in the perspective of its portrayal of God’s image and the justification of hell. 

In this epic poem, God is portrayed as a super being guilty of multiple weaknesses including being egotistic, unjust, and hypocritical. Dante, in this poem, depicts God as being more human than divine by challenging God’s omnipotence. Additionally, the manner in which Dante describes Hell is in full contradiction to the morals of God as written in the Bible. When god arranges Hell to flatter Himself, He commits egotism, a sin that is common among human beings (Cheney, 2016). The weakness is depicted in Limbo and on the Gate of Hell where, for instance, God sends those who do not worship Him to Hell. This implies that failure to worship Him is a sin.


This question has been answered

God is also depicted as lacking justice in His actions thus removing the godly image. The injustice is portrayed by the manner in which the sodomites and opportunists are treated. The opportunists are subjected to banner chasing in their lives after death followed by being stung by insects and maggots. They are known to having done neither good nor bad during their lifetimes and, therefore, justice could have demanded that they be granted a neutral punishment having lived a neutral life. The sodomites are also punished unfairly by God when Brunetto Lattini is condemned to hell despite being a good leader (Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). While he commited sodomy, God chooses to ignore all the other good deeds that Brunetto did.

Finally, God is also portrayed as being hypocritical in His actions, a sin that further diminishes His godliness and makes Him more human. A case in point is when God condemns the sin of egotism and goes ahead to commit it repeatedly. Proverbs 29:23 states that “arrogance will bring your downfall, but if you are humble, you will be respected.” When Slattery condemns Dante’s human state as being weak, doubtful, and limited, he is proving God’s hypocrisy because He is also human (Verdicchio, 2015). The actions of God in Hell as portrayed by Dante are inconsistent with the Biblical literature. Both Dante and God are prone to making mistakes, something common among human beings thus making God more human.

To wrap it up, Dante portrays God is more human since He commits the same sins that humans commit: egotism, hypocrisy, and injustice. Hell is justified as being a destination for victims of the mistakes committed by God. The Hell is presented as being a totally different place as compared to what is written about it in the Bible. As a result, reading through the text gives an image of God who is prone to the very mistakes common to humans thus ripping Him off His lofty status of divine and, instead, making Him a mere human. Whether or not Dante did it intentionally is subject to debate but one thing is clear in the poem: the misconstrued notion of God is revealed to future generations.

 

References

Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). Dante’s inferno: Seven deadly sins in scientific publishing and how to avoid them. Addiction Science: A Guide for the Perplexed, 267.

Cheney, L. D. G. (2016). Illustrations for Dante’s Inferno: A Comparative Study of Sandro Botticelli, Giovanni Stradano, and Federico Zuccaro. Cultural and Religious Studies, 4(8), 487.

Verdicchio, M. (2015). Irony and Desire in Dante’s” Inferno” 27. Italica, 285-297.

Let’s break down these legal questions.

I. Hurdles Litigants Face with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Standing:

“Standing” in legal terms refers to a party’s ability to bring a lawsuit. To have standing, a litigant must typically show:

  • Injury in Fact: They have suffered, or are likely to suffer, a concrete and particularized injury.
  • Causation: The injury is fairly traceable to the defendant’s actions.
  • Redressability: The injury is likely to be remedied by a favorable court decision.

When it comes to the ESA, litigants, especially environmental groups, often face hurdles in proving these elements, particularly “injury in fact” and “causation.” Here’s why:

  • Diffuse Injuries:
    • Environmental injuries can be diffuse and shared by many, rather than affecting a specific individual directly. For example, harm to a species or ecosystem may affect the public at large, making it difficult to show a particularized injury.
    • Courts have been hesitant to grant standing based on generalized grievances.

Let’s break down these legal questions.

I. Hurdles Litigants Face with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Standing:

“Standing” in legal terms refers to a party’s ability to bring a lawsuit. To have standing, a litigant must typically show:

  • Injury in Fact: They have suffered, or are likely to suffer, a concrete and particularized injury.
  • Causation: The injury is fairly traceable to the defendant’s actions.
  • Redressability: The injury is likely to be remedied by a favorable court decision.

When it comes to the ESA, litigants, especially environmental groups, often face hurdles in proving these elements, particularly “injury in fact” and “causation.” Here’s why:

  • Diffuse Injuries:
    • Environmental injuries can be diffuse and shared by many, rather than affecting a specific individual directly. For example, harm to a species or ecosystem may affect the public at large, making it difficult to show a particularized injury.
    • Courts have been hesitant to grant standing based on generalized grievances.
  • Speculative Injuries:
    • Often, the harm to a species or ecosystem is prospective or speculative. Litigants must prove a likely, not merely possible, injury.
    • This can be challenging when dealing with complex ecological systems and long-term impacts.
  • Causation Challenges:
    • Proving a direct causal link between a specific action and harm to an endangered species can be difficult.
    • Environmental harm is often the result of multiple factors, making it hard to isolate the defendant’s actions.
    • For example, proving that a specific development project directly caused the decline of a certain animal population, can be very hard to prove in a court of law.
  • “Zone of Interests” Test:
    • Courts also apply the “zone of interests” test, which requires that the plaintiff’s interests fall within the zone of interests protected by the statute in question (the ESA).
    • This can be a hurdle for litigants whose interests are seen as too remote or indirect.
  • Procedural Hurdles:
    • Many ESA cases involve challenges to agency actions. Litigants must often navigate complex administrative procedures and meet strict deadlines.
    • These procedural requirements can create barriers to bringing lawsuits.

II. Contract Dispute: Verbal Agreement vs. Express Terms:

In this scenario, Party B will likely prevail. Here’s why:

  • Parol Evidence Rule:
    • The parol evidence rule generally prohibits the introduction of extrinsic evidence (such as oral agreements) to contradict or vary the terms of a complete and unambiguous written contract.
    • The purpose of this rule is to ensure the certainty and stability of written contracts.
  • Complete and Unambiguous Contract:
    • The question states that the contract’s terms are “complete and unambiguous.” This means that the contract is considered to be the final and complete expression of the parties’ agreement.
    • Therefore the court will not look to outside evidence.
  • Verbal Agreement Contradicts Express Terms:
    • Party A’s argument relies on a verbal agreement that directly contradicts the express terms of the written contract.
    • Under the parol evidence rule, this verbal agreement is inadmissible.
  • Exception Limitations:
    • While there are exceptions to the parol evidence rule (e.g., to show fraud, duress, or ambiguity), these exceptions do not appear to apply in this case.
    • The fact that the contract is unambiguous, means that those exceptions are not applicable.
  • Written contracts are king:
    • Courts highly favor written contracts, as they are seen as the best evidence of the agreement between the parties.

In summary: Because the contract is complete and unambiguous, and the verbal agreement contradicts the express terms, the parol evidence rule will likely prevent Party A from introducing evidence of the verbal agreement. Therefore, Party B’s argument, based on the written contract, will prevail.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer