The Supreme Court on Thursday issued a ruling narrowing the federal government's authority regulating bodies of water and effectively upending a Biden administration policy that recently went into effect.
The high court's unanimous 9-0 decision, which was delivered by Justice Samuel Alito, rejected the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) broad definition of Waters of the United States (WOTUS). The case centered on Michael and Chantell Sackett, two Idaho residents whom the EPA prohibited from building a home near a wetland years ago, citing the Clean Waters Act (CWA) of 1972.
"The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day," Alito's majority opinion stated. "The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as 'waters of the United States' because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not 'waters of the United States.'"
The ruling ultimately held that the federal government's WOTUS definition must be restricted to a water source with a "continuous surface connection" to major bodies of water.
While the decision was unanimous on the merits, the court split 5-4 on determining how the federal government should go about defining water sources.
---------------------
Hey they kepts one thing close at 5-4
Enviro wackos are nuts.
www.foxnews.com
The high court's unanimous 9-0 decision, which was delivered by Justice Samuel Alito, rejected the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) broad definition of Waters of the United States (WOTUS). The case centered on Michael and Chantell Sackett, two Idaho residents whom the EPA prohibited from building a home near a wetland years ago, citing the Clean Waters Act (CWA) of 1972.
"The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day," Alito's majority opinion stated. "The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as 'waters of the United States' because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not 'waters of the United States.'"
The ruling ultimately held that the federal government's WOTUS definition must be restricted to a water source with a "continuous surface connection" to major bodies of water.
While the decision was unanimous on the merits, the court split 5-4 on determining how the federal government should go about defining water sources.
---------------------
Hey they kepts one thing close at 5-4
Enviro wackos are nuts.
Supreme Court delivers blow to key Biden environmental policy
The Supreme Court upended a Biden administration environmental regulation broadly defining and regulating which water sources the federal government has authority over.
