Winter V. Natural Resources Defense Council - Opinion of The Court

Opinion of The Court

The majority opinion held that as an initial matter the Ninth Circuit’s “possibility” test for issuance of a preliminary injunction is too lenient; plaintiffs must show that irreparable injury is “likely” in the absence of an injunction. However, the Court continued, even if plaintiffs had shown irreparable injury (and, too, likelihood of success on the merits), it is “plainly outweighed” by the Navy’s interest in effective, realistic training of its sailors. That factor alone requires denial of the requested injunctive relief. For the plaintiffs, the most serious possible injury would be the loss of ability to observe an unknown number of marine mammals. In light of the foregoing, the Court reversed the decision below and vacated the preliminary injunction.

Parenthetically, said the Court, the same balancing factor requiring vacatur of the preliminary injunction here would also bear on a challenge to any future permanent injunction.

The Court did not address the merits of the lawsuit—that is, whether the Navy exercises violated NEPA or the other federal environmental laws claimed to be violated.