I vaguely remember this case (it’s 15 years old). The issue was that an outrageously overzealous EPA was determining large swaths of land were wetland for reasons nearly as compelling as: a frog once hopped across it.
EPA bureaucrats are not normal people; they are green extremists who joined government to force a warped agenda.
This article is deliberately slanted. One need only note that the property in question is consistently described as “wetland”. That was the key question of the case; what qualifies as wetland? The SCOTUS properly found that the EPA doesn’t have the authority to arbitrarily declare any area they want as a wetland. The EPA should have to pay all of their court costs and attorney fees.
Yes, I remember that too.
One of the deciding factors in the Sackett case was that the EPA decided that WOTUS allowed any body of water that touched another body of water to be regulated under WOTUS.
And then the EPA added underground water flows ... even if there was no physical surface connection.
What would be next?
Anyone that carried water from place to place - after all, people are 65% water ...
Yep. The legislation defines the protected water as the Navigable waters of the United States. Their solid land 100 feet from a lake or pond doesn’t fit into that definition!