A fight over habitat protection on private land for an endangered frog species may hinge on what the Supreme Court considers a reasonable expense for a federal agency to impose on landowners.
During Oct. 1 arguments in Weyerhaeuser Co. v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the justices pressed attorneys repeatedly on what “reasonable efforts” would be to convert habitat currently unsuitable to the frog to conditions that could allow the frog to survive.
Among those seeking a definition of reasonableness were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito.
The federal government has designated the land—1,544 acres ...