Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: freeangel

If I’m not mistaken the EPA sued the couple for $40 million dollars!!! Incredible. I salute that couple for not backing down and yes, whoever is responsible should go down!


21 posted on 01/09/2012 11:00:30 AM PST by Bitsy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Bitsy

I fear that one day, somebody is going to retaliate for the EPA’s crap and take matters into their own hand. I also think that the EPA should be very afraid that it will happen.

Rats will gnaw their leg off to escape a trap; wounded deer will attack you; what makes anyone think that the animal in all of us will react any differently?


30 posted on 01/09/2012 11:15:19 AM PST by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: Bitsy
If I’m not mistaken the EPA sued the couple for $40 million dollars!!! Incredible.

No, the EPA didn't sue them. That's what the case is actually all about.

EPA told the couple that their property is a wetland, and if they build on it they will face a fine of $37,500 per day. The couple said, no, it's not a wetland. The EPA said, OK, go ahead and build on it, and then we'll sue you for the $37,500 per day, and then the court will decide if it's a wetland or not.

The couple then sued the EPA so it could get a court decision on whether it's a wetland or not before they build; the theory of their lawsuit is that if the EPA is right and they are wrong, they want to know it before they incur ruinous fines.

The lower courts said that they can't sue the EPA, they have to wait for the EPA to sue them. That's the only issue before the Court: not whether the property is a wetland, but whether they can sue before they build.

The facts are so sympathetic for the couple, and the EPA is being so heavy-handed, that the couple will probably win. But the usual rule in most areas of law is the other way: for example, I can't sue the police before I shoot someone to get an advisory ruling if it would be self-defense or murder.

65 posted on 01/09/2012 5:36:24 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson