The following excerpt is from Daly v. Volpe, 514 F.2d 1106 (9th Cir. 1975):
The district court, in granting the preliminary injunction, ordered preparation of another EIS. The appellants imply that, because the resulting EIS recommends the same route as did the prior EIS, the preparation of the new EIS must have been a mere exercise. Appellants apparently reason that, had any thought been given to the new EIS, a different route would have been chosen. This attempt to monopolize wisdom overlooks the presumption of regularity that must be given to administrative decisions. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 U.S. at 415. There is no showing that the administrative action was irregular and taken in bad faith. We will assume therefore that the EIS is not a sham.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.