Filed Date: June 10, 2026
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
This suit challenges the United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s deal with SpaceX to exchange a wildlife refuge’s land for private land, allegedly without regard for protection of historical sites and conservation goals.
On June 10, 2026, several environmental nonprofits, including the Center for Biological Diversity, Save RGV, the Carrizo/Comecrudo Nation of Texas, and South Texas Environmental Justice Network, filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (the “Service”) and its Director. Plaintiffs challenged the Service's approval of the "Boca Chica Land Exchange," under which it agreed to transfer 715 acres of the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge (“LRGV Refuge”) to SpaceX in exchange for 683 acres of private land, despite the LRGV Refuge already falling more than 30,000 acres short of its conservation goals established in a 1997 management plan.The land to be transferred includes undeveloped tidal marsh, saline prairie, coastal thornscrub, and other ecologically connected habitats, and overlaps with approximately 703 acres of the Palmito Ranch Battlefield National Historic Landmark—the site of the final battle of the Civil War. The Plaintiffs alleged that the Service failed to ensure the protection of the historical site, relied on unsupported data developed in collaboration with SpaceX, failed to consider adequate alternatives in its Environmental Assessment, and had not updated the Refuge’s management plan since 1997 despite significant changes caused by SpaceX’s operations. The Plaintiffs also contended that the Service failed to demonstrate that the exchange would further the Refuge’s purposes as required. Plaintiffs asserted five claims for relief under the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act (NWRSIA), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). They sought declaratory relief, vacatur and injunctive relief blocking implementation of the exchange, a mandatory order compelling revision of the management plan, and attorneys' fees. The case was assigned to Judge John D. Bates.
As of June 16, 2026, briefing is ongoing.
Summary Authors
(6/14/2026)
Kara Wilczynski (6/23/2026)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73464544/parties/center-for-biological-diversity-v-nesvik/
Bates, John D. (District of Columbia)
Ditmars, Ivan (District of Columbia)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73464544/center-for-biological-diversity-v-nesvik/
Last updated June 23, 2026, 3:09 a.m.
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government
Key Dates
Filing Date: June 10, 2026
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Several non-profit organizations focused on environmental protection, including the Center for Biological Diversity, Save RGV, the Carrizo/Comecrudo Nation of Texas, and the South Texas Environmental Justice Network
Plaintiff Type(s):
Non-profit NON-religious organization
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Federal
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.
National Environmental Protection Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321–4370f
Other Dockets:
District of District of Columbia 1:26-cv-02053
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Relief Sought:
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Issues
Environmental Justice and Resources:
Case Summary of Center for Biological Diversity v. Nesvik, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/48217/ (last updated 6/23/2026).