Posted on 06/29/2015 10:14:00 AM PDT by jazusamo
Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi sued the Obama administration Monday to stop a new regulation asserting federal authority over minor waterways like streams and wetlands.
The rule from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is one of the most controversial regulations from the Obama administration, redefining how the EPA enforces the water pollution protections of the Clean Water Act.
In the lawsuit, filed in a Houston-based federal court, the states argue that the rule “is an unconstitutional and impermissible expansion of federal power over the states and their citizens and property owners.” The states’ attorneys general — all Republican — said the “waters of the United States” rule violates the clear language of the Clean Water Act that drew a line between federal authority and that of states or private landowners over waterways.
“Whereas Congress defined the limits of its commerce power through the Clean Water Act to protect the quality of American waters, the Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers, through the Final Rule, are attempting to expand their authority to regulate water and land use by the states and their citizens,” they wrote.
The case appears to be the first lawsuit against the rule, though it’s unlikely to be the last. Apart from many states, farmers, developers, business groups and others oppose rule, which they said could give the EPA power over almost any piece of land.
The administration wrote the rule and made it final last month in an attempt to clarify its jurisdiction after two Supreme Court cases made it murky. While about 3 percent more area is now covered by the Clean Water Act than before, the protections are still smaller than they were during President Bill Clinton’s administration.
The Clean Water Act gives federal officials jurisdiction over “navigable” water, but they also must regulate a certain distance upstream to protect the main waterways.
If a waterway is under federal jurisdiction, landowners might need permits for anything that harms or pollutes it.
“We’re finalizing a clean water rule to protect the streams and the wetlands that one in three Americans rely on for drinking water,” EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said when rolling out the rule. “And we’re doing that without creating any new permitting requirements and maintaining all previous exemptions and exclusions.”
Brian Deese, a top adviser to President Obama, said “the only people with reason to oppose the rule are polluters who want to threaten our clean water.”
The agency made a point when it unveiled the rule to explain what is not covered, including standard agricultural practices and isolated ponds.
The House has voted to overturn the rule, and the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee has passed a bill to overturn it while giving the EPA specific instructions to re-write it.
Awwww, that is so cute. The states actually thinking they still matter.
What is even cuter is the Feds thinking they have a future. Unless they can squeeze 50 Trillion out of us turnips, they have no future.
Why sue, just block the stupid rule.
I live in Texas and I’d like the feds to step out of state issues. I’d like to see my state build even more lakes and reservoirs, and dams. I’m sure west Texas can take up all the agriculture that California is so willing to give away.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.