Expert sounds the alarm after U.S. Supreme Court sides with couple wanting to build house at protected site

The Cool Down ^ | Sep 5, 2023 | Laurelle Stelle

[where's_the_Outrage?]

Since the creation of the Clean Water Act in 1972, the federal government has had the authority to protect bodies of water throughout the U.S. from pollution. This traditionally included wetlands, which play a vital role in feeding open bodies of water like rivers and lakes.

However, thanks to a Supreme Court ruling in May, this federal protection has been removed from many crucial wetlands across the country, the Guardian reports.

What happened? According to the Guardian, Michael and Chantell Sackett are Idaho residents who bought a half-acre lot in 2004 near Priest Lake, one of the state’s largest bodies of water. They intended to build a home there and started to fill in the marshy site with gravel.

The Sacketts didn’t know that the site was a protected wetland, which they would need a permit to fill in, the Guardian explains. The EPA stepped in to stop construction and issued serious fines for the work already done.

The Sacketts began a 15-year legal battle, which made it to the Supreme Court this year. The central question was whether the EPA had the authority to prevent the Sacketts from building on a wetland area........

“For 50 years the Clean Water Act has been instrumental in revitalizing and safeguarding drinking water sources for people and wildlife, wetlands for flood control, and habitats that sustain our wildlife heritage,” said Murphy. “The court’s ruling removes these vital protections from important streams and wetlands in every state. We call on both Congress and state governments to step in, plug the gap, and protect our threatened waters and the people that depend on them.”

[Rusty0604]

Yes, I remember that too.

[tlozo]

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump promised to “eliminate the unconstitutional Waters of the U.S. rule” and constrain federal regulation of private land use. According to then‐​candidate Trump, the Obama administration’s 2015 regulation defining “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act (CWA)—the so‐​called WOTUS rule—was “so extreme that it gives federal agencies control over creeks, small streams, and even puddles or mostly dry areas on private property.” While guaranteeing “crystal clear” water under his administration, Trump also pledged to lessen the federal regulatory burden on landowners.

In 2001, in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (SWANCC), the Supreme Court rejected the agencies’ assertion of CWA jurisdiction over a pond that had formed in an abandoned gravel pit.

The Supreme Court had sent the EPA and Army Corps a powerful message about the scope of their regulatory ambitions, but the agencies refused to listen. After briefly considering revising their regulations in light of the SWANCC opinion, the two agencies continued to assert broad regulatory authority throughout much of the country. The Army Corps and EPA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to consider revising their jurisdictional regulations in 2003, but abandoned the effort in response to criticism from environmentalist and conservationist groups that feared a regulatory rollback.

https://www.cato.org/regulation/summer-2019/redefining-waters-united-states#

[waterhill]

So would not the dried up lake bed in Nevada be a wetland? (Burning man festival)

[bert]

No. The government agency exists to enforce the very narrow views of envirowackos. The wackos are athe problem and must be exterminated

[PIF]

We can thank the (R) president that gave us the EPA.
—
Noxious Nixon and his Imperial Presidency.

[PIF]

Ruling:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-454_4g15.pdf

[bert]

apparently, recently it was actually a lake again. It is a recurring lake and thus a recurring wetland.

[JayGalt]

This is a wonderful precedent.
Americans need to shut down those power hungry, empire building federal bureaucrats. They have a narrow lane & should keep to it.

[JayGalt]

More good news!

[FLT-bird]

In other words, the EPA does not get to step in and claim you cannot touch any puddle or ditch on your property like they were trying to do.....all without paying you one red cent for massively devaluing your property by forbidding any development or use of it.

[Savage Beast]

Yes, after struggling for five years with bureaucrats, who if employed at their competence level would have been pushing mops and who, among other brilliant ideas, wanted the fire lanes to be declared "wetlands" (rain water pools in them), I finally had no choice but to sell one of the most gorgeous 150 acres of pristine, old growth forest, wildlife inhabited sanctuaries on earth to developers.

It's now stumps and weeds.

What happened to the beautiful wild animals I do not know.

I warned the bureaucrats in advance. They didn't care.

My plan had been to keep it all preserved in its wild, beautiful condition. They didn't care about that either.

[Jim Noble]

That’s why we’re doomed if the Biden regime is not obliterated in the next election

And replaced by what? The Pence regime?

[joe fonebone]

C’mon.....
It’s wHitler...

[GreenHornet]

The Sacketts didn’t know that the site was a protected wetland, which they would need a permit to fill in, the Guardian explains.

Other issues aside, shouldn't there have been a requirement on the part of the sellers to disclose this information to the Sacketts when they bought the property?

[CodeJockey]

Of The People
By The People
For The People

[dfwgator]

Of the Lawyers
By the Lawyers
For the Lawyers

[Sacajaweau]

Absolutely..

.We had a ridiculo8us case in our area...they threatened a $12,000 per day fine. The project had a stream going through it. No wetland...they just said because they were NEAR a creek (buffer zone), it was a wetland and they created some false wetland boundary. The people said...you're full of baloney. The land was formerly a peach orchard with building etc..The people lost. This was shortly after the original 1972 "law". They would win today...9-0.

[larrytown]

I had a vernal pool in my backyard, until I put in a French drain.

It’s all those French dudes fault...

[goodnesswins]

Of the government
By the government
For the government

[dfwgator]

Who makes up the government?