Below are a select sampling of some of my active litigations throughout state and federal court systems.
Save Long Beach Island v. U.S. Department of Commerce, Orsted, Atlantic Shores
Synopsis: There has been a statistically significant increase in marine mammal deaths in the waters of the NY/NJ Bight, beginning in December 2022. These deaths are causally connected to the noise produced by survey vessels (characterizing the seabed in preparation for wind turbine construction) which induce behavioral disturbances, frequently leading to deaths to whales and dolphins. We have significant evidence and expert testimony demonstrating that this anomalous increase in deaths is ascribed to vessel survey noise (which approximates the sonar of whales and dolphins). We seek to halt all offshore surveying and compel an independent investigation.
See relevant media articles highlighting my federal court case here:
See presentation given by me at Barnegat Light, NJ (mine begins at approximately the 28:00 minute mark):
Nantucket Residents Against Turbines v. U.S. BOEM, Vineyard Wind 1 LLC
Synopsis: Vineyard Wind I LLC, a major wind energy company, received approval from the Federal Government agencies (BOEM, NMFS) to construct their wind project off the coast of New England. This appeal seeks to reverse the approval due to the fact that the environmental review by the federal agencies was significantly deficient in numerous key ways. The agencies failed to consider important risks posed to the critically endangered North Atlantic Right Whale, and Vineyard Wind’s proposed measures to “mitigate” the risks posed by its project are grossly insufficient.
Relevant news articles highlighting my appeal: https://nantucketcurrent.com/news/road-toward-extinction-nantucket-group-appeals-vineyard-wind-decision
Short Jr. v. New Jersey Department of Education, Cherry Hill School District
Synopsis: The Cherry Hill School District adopted a policy (via their Board of Education), derived from the NJ Department of Education’s guidance, that requires schools to keep confidential students’ gender identities (and any changes of their gender identity) from their parents. We argue that this is unconstitutional and ultra vires. We seek a striking or amendment of the policy that requires parental notification and consent. When a student expresses a desire to change their gender identity, this is fundamentally a psychotherapeutic intervention, which warrants parental involvement, as experts have stated. This action does not threaten trans-students rights, rather, it will provide for their best interest, and the best interest of all students, by guarding their mental health. The Cherry Hill Policy and NJ Guidance fosters double lives of secrecy, child mistrust of their parents, and an atmosphere of anxiety and tension.
Relevant media articles highlighting my federal court case: