2026年3月9日 美国东部时间下午5:30 / 路透社
关岛是美国太平洋领地，图为2017年8月11日美军安德森空军基地入口的景象。路透社/埃里克·德卡斯特罗/档案照片 [购买授权，在新标签页打开]
- 摘要
- 空军在海滩引爆危险废物炸药
- 环保人士呼吁进行环境影响评估
- 上诉法院允许环境诉讼继续推进
3月9日（路透社）- 美国最高法院周一同意受理唐纳德·特朗普总统政府提出的一项诉求，即驳回环保人士对美国空军在关岛海滩引爆危险废物炸药做法的质疑。
大法官们同意受理司法部对下级法院一项裁决的上诉。该裁决允许由”普鲁泰希关岛”（Prutehi Guahan）和”地球正义”（Earthjustice）等环保组织提起的诉讼继续进行，这些组织指控美国空军忽视了联邦法律要求对此类做法进行环境影响评估的规定。
订阅《每日 docket》新闻通讯，每日清晨获取最新法律新闻直抵您的收件箱。立即注册。
自1982年以来，美国空军一直在关岛一个限制进入的地点——塔拉格海滩（Tarague Beach）处置催泪瓦斯和推进剂等危险弹药。关岛是美国太平洋领地，距离夏威夷约3,800英里（6,100公里），是西太平洋军事行动的重要基地。
塔拉格海滩是濒危海龟的筑巢栖息地，并且位于为岛上80%以上人口提供饮用水的含水层上方。
在特朗普及其前任乔·拜登任内，美国政府均试图驳回该诉讼。联邦初审法官驳回诉讼后，总部位于旧金山的美国第九巡回上诉法院去年恢复了此案。
政府表示，原告提出的论点将给美国军方和联邦机构带来不必要的环境许可要求负担，而国会在通过相关规定时并未考虑到这些负担。
美国空军未立即回应置评请求。
“既然最高法院决定审理此案，我们将继续捍卫关岛居民保护自身健康、土地和资源的权利，”地球正义律师大卫·亨金（David Henkin）表示。
这一争议涉及1970年颁布的《国家环境政策法》（NEPA），该法要求联邦机构编制”环境影响声明”——评估拟议中的重大联邦行动对环境影响的文件。
2021年，美国空军请求关岛监管机构更新其在安德森空军基地附近的塔拉格海滩进行危险废物露天焚烧和引爆的许可证。关岛环保非营利组织”普鲁泰希关岛”在法庭上质疑此举的合法性，该案由地球正义的律师代理。
“普鲁泰希关岛”辩称，在申请许可证更新前，美国空军依法必须评估其废物处置做法的环境影响并提出替代方案。该诉讼寻求法院命令，要求美国空军编制环境影响声明。
关岛一名联邦法官驳回了此案，称”普鲁泰希关岛”缺乏起诉资格。但第九巡回上诉法院一个由三名法官组成的小组以2比1的投票结果裁定恢复此案，同意”普鲁泰希关岛”的观点，即美国空军在提交许可证更新申请前需要进行环境影响评估。
司法部在向最高法院上诉时辩称，美国空军无需遵守《国家环境政策法》，因为其已遵循另一项法律《资源保护与回收法》（1976年颁布，监管危险废物处置）规定的步骤。
司法部称，第九巡回法院的裁决可能”以过早和重复的司法及行政程序形式给联邦法院和联邦机构造成重大负担，并阻碍州和联邦机构履行其许可职责”。
最高法院将于今年10月开始的下一个开庭期审理此案。
报道：扬·沃尔夫；编辑：威尔·邓纳姆
我们的标准：路透社信托原则。[在新标签页打开]
节点运行失败
US Supreme Court to hear Guam hazardous waste explosions case
March 9, 2026 5:30 PM UTC / Reuters
A view of the entrance of U.S. military Andersen Air Force base on the island of Guam, a U.S. Pacific Territory, August 11, 2017. REUTERS/Erik De Castro/File Photo [Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab]
- Summary
- Air Force detonates hazardous waste explosives at beach
- Environmentalists call for environmental impact assessment
- Appeals court had allowed environmental suit to proceed
March 9 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Monday to hear a bid by President Donald Trump’s administration to dismiss a challenge by environmentalists to the U.S. Air Force’s practice of detonating hazardous waste explosives on a beach in Guam.
The justices agreed to hear the Justice Department’s appeal of a lower court’s ruling allowing a lawsuit pursued by the environmental groups Prutehi Guahan and Earthjustice accusing the Air Force of ignoring a requirement under federal law to assess the environmental impact of a practice like this one.
Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.
Since 1982, the Air Force has disposed of hazardous munitions such as tear gas and propellants on Tarague Beach, a restricted-access location in Guam, a U.S. territory roughly 3,800 miles (6,100 km) from Hawaii that acts as an anchor for military operations in the Western Pacific.
Tarague Beach serves as a nesting habitat for the endangered turtles and sits above an aquifer that provides more than 80% of the island’s population with drinking water.
The U.S. government, under both Trump and his predecessor Joe Biden, has sought to have the lawsuit thrown out. After a federal trial judge dismissed the lawsuit, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated it last year.
The government has said that the arguments made by the plaintiffs would burden the U.S. military and federal agencies with unnecessary environmental permitting requirements that Congress never contemplated when it passed the mandates at issue.
The Air Force did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
“Now that the Supreme Court has decided to hear the case, we will continue to defend Guam residents’ ability to protect their health, their land and their resources,” Earthjustice lawyer David Henkin said.
The dispute concerns the National Environmental Policy Act, a law from 1970 requiring federal agencies to produce “environmental impact statements” – documents that assess the environmental consequences of proposed major federal actions.
In 2021, the Air Force asked Guam regulators to renew a permit to conduct open burning and open detonation of hazardous waste at Tarague Beach, located near Andersen Air Force Base. Prutehi Guahan, an environmental protection nonprofit in Guam, challenged the legality of the move in court. It is represented in the case by lawyers at Earthjustice.
Prutehi Guahan argued that, before seeking the permit renewal, the Air Force was legally required to assess the environmental impact of its waste disposal practices and propose alternatives. The suit seeks a court order requiring the Air Force to produce an environmental impact statement.
A federal judge in Guam dismissed the case, saying Prutehi Guahan lacked standing to sue. But a 9th Circuit three-judge panel ruled 2-1 to revive the case, agreeing with Prutehi Guahan that the Air Force needed to conduct an environmental impact assessment before submitting a permit-renewal application.
In appealing to the Supreme Court, the Justice Department argued that the Air Force did not need to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act because it had followed steps mandated under a different law, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, which regulates the disposal of hazardous waste.
The 9th Circuit’s decision threatens to “inflict significant burdens on both federal courts and federal agencies in the form of premature and duplicative judicial and administrative proceedings, and to impede state and federal agencies’ performance of their permitting responsibilities,” the Justice Department wrote.
The Supreme Court is due to hear the case during its next term, which begins in October.
Reporting by Jan Wolfe; Editing by Will Dunham
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab
节点运行失败
发表回复