Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/17-71_omjp.pdf
Page Number: 4

Cite as:  586 U. S. ____ (2018) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington,  D. C.  20543,  of  any  typographical  or  other  formal  errors,  in  order
that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 17–71 
_________________ 

WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY, PETITIONER v.
 
UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE 

SERVICE, ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 

APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
 

[November 27, 2018]

 CHIEF  JUSTICE  ROBERTS  delivered  the  opinion  of  the

Court. 

The Endangered Species Act directs the Secretary of the
Interior,  upon  listing  a  species  as  endangered,  to  also
designate  the  “critical  habitat”  of  the  species.    A  group  of 
landowners  whose  property  was  designated  as  critical
habitat for an endangered frog challenged the designation.
The  landowners  urge  that  their  land  cannot  be  critical 
habitat because it is not habitat, which they contend refers 
only to areas where the frog could currently survive.  The 
court below ruled that the Act imposed no such limitation 
on the scope of critical habitat.

The Act also authorizes the Secretary to exclude an area 
that would otherwise be included as critical habitat, if the 
benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of designation. 
The  landowners  challenged  the  decision  of  the  Secretary
not to exclude their property, but the court below held that 
the Secretary’s action was not subject to judicial review. 

We granted certiorari to review both rulings.