After the BP well ruptured on April 20, spewing millions of gallons of crude, President Barack Obama had imposed ban on deep-sea drilling while officials checked that other wells were operating safely.

However, more than a dozen oil companies requested before the court in New Orleans to overturn the ban.

A judge blocked the Obama administration’s ban on deepwater drilling, complicating its efforts to improve the safety of offshore oil operations.

In granting a request by more than a dozen oil services companies for the ban to be overturned, Judge Martin Feldman challenged its “immense scope.”

The White House said it would immediately appeal the judge’s ruling, issued in New Orleans.

There is a mixed reaction to this overruling of ban, but has infuriated many US environmental groups. The Sierra Club said it would join the Obama administration in its appeal and called the ruling "a slap in the face to the communities that have been hit hard by this tragedy." The spill has dealt a severe blow to the US Gulf Coast's tourism and fishing industries and soiled large parts of a 400-mile coastline from Louisiana to Florida.

The ruling was welcomed by those Gulf Coast residents whose livelihoods depend on the oil industry. "It takes away the uncertainty. It's going to get some people back to work immediately," said Tony Frickey, site supervisor at the Venice Port Complex in Venice, Louisiana.

EU's Carbon Emissions Trading Scheme for aviation sector is due to be enforced from 2012. All airlines flying into EU airports will be required to submit carbon credits for both the inward and outward legs of their journey.

American aviation sector is not happy with the cuts and according to Air Transport Association of America (ATA), this would impose costly policies on international aviation. It would be a violation of international law and take money away from funds they need to continue to improve their ‘strong record of continuous environmental improvement’.

ATA wants a judicial review of the scheme and the International Airlines be exempted.

Nancy Young of ATA said, “The legal case is important as a means of addressing what is wrong with the European scheme, but also as an opportunity for us to continue to pursue an approach that is appropriate for this global industry”.

WWF accused airlines of using ‘every trick in the book’ to try to stop international efforts to tackle emissions through regulatory measures without providing ‘any credible alternative to put a cap on emissions’.

The US Supreme Court ruled in Monsanto Company v. Geerston Seed Farms that the district court abused its discretion when it issued a nation wide injunction against a genetically modified alfalfa seed. The district court sought to remedy a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) violation based on only a remote possibility of reparable harm.

The case arose over an injunction against planting of Monsanto's "Roundup Ready Alfafa" (RRA), pending an environmental impact statement(EIS). Conventional alfalfa growers and environmental groups filed an action against decision by Animal and Plant Health Inspection Sevice (APHIS) to deregulate RRA unconditionally and without preparing a detailed EIS for every major Federal action, signifactly affecting the quality of human environment. The disrtrict court vacated the agency's desision completely, deregulating the RRA.

The court also upheld that both the respondent and petitioner had constitutional standing for injunctive relief and judicial review respectively. Alito stated that each party’s claims address a particular and imminent injury that was substantially related to the challenged action, and was redressable by the court.