EPA is just playing the game of follow the leader.
Oh gee! The EPA did such a good job in Colorado! Why not give them control over all the water in the country? /HEAVY, HEAVY SARCASM
The government needs to be bitch-slapped to sleep then slapped for sleeping!
This damned government is out of control and our so-called representatives are utterly worthless. We have allowed ourselves to be ruled by an assortment of pansies.
....just another talking point for the Donald to address while stumping...*smiles*..another 3 points up
EPA says the H€LL with Courts when they don’t win. However, they love decisions when they do. EPA, just another lawless Agency controlled by a lawless President.
Nothing will stop this government, but force. No single Federal Judge will be allowed to stop the Marxists.
So then arrest them all, or they will do exactly that.
Is there such a thing as contempt of court anymore? Judge needs to slap them all in jail.
Massive civil disobedience is needed.
This administration of lawless dictators must be purged all the way down to the lowest operational level. They are a national cancer.
Of course they will. Getting their claws deeper and deeper into property and land rights.
Jail the EPA leader for contempt of court and don’t them out until Obama sends a letter that he will uphold the court’s decision.
It’s time the courts assert their authority over this little racist marxist and his minions. They think they are free from the power of congress and the courts. We still have a constitution even if Marxists find it inconvenient.
Hard to abide by “Rule of Law” when those in power have gone lawless...
I had done some scratching concerning the federal government unconstitutionally expanding its powers by abusing treaty power and discovered the following. In the early 20th century, and with the help of activist justices, Congress had evidently used its power to negotiate treaties to steal 10th Amendment-protected state power to regulate water rights imo.
More specifically, although I'm happy that Native Americans were insured a supply of water for agricultural purposes, as evidenced by the Supreme Court's decision in Winters v. United States (Winters) activist justices had given Congress the green light to regulate intrastate water rights, such federal legislative powers wrongly interpolated from Congress's power to negotiate treaties imo.
It turns out that the activist justices who had decided Winters had argued that the Supremacy Clause, Section 2 of Article VII, in conjunction with Congress's power to negotiate treaties, trumped 10th Amendment-protected state power to regulate intrastate water. In fact, the justice who had argued that treaties trump the 10th Amendment, Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., is one of main justices credited for fostering the idea of the "living Constitution” where activist justices basically interpret the Constitution any way that they want to.
However, regarding such a perspective on the scope of Congress's power to negotiate treaties, and as similarly noted with respect to controversial United Nations issues, please consider the following.
Thomas Jefferson, based on his experience as Vice President and President of the Senate, had officially clarified that Congress cannot use its power to negotiate treaties as a back door to establish new powers for itself, powers not based on the limited powers which the states have delegated to Congress via the Constitution.
“In giving to the President and Senate a power to make treaties, the Constitution meant only to authorize them to carry into effect, by way of treaty, any powers they might constitutionally exercise.” —Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793.
“Surely the President and Senate cannot do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way.” —Thomas Jefferson: Parliamentary Manual, 1812.
Also note that the Supreme Court had later reflected on Jefferson’s words, clarifying that Congress cannot use it’s power to negotiate treaties as a backdoor way to expand its constitutionally-limited powers.
"2. Insofar as Art. 2(11) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice provides for the military trial of civilian dependents accompanying the armed forces in foreign countries, it cannot be sustained as legislation which is "necessary and proper" to carry out obligations of the United States under international agreements made with those countries, since no agreement with a foreign nation can confer on Congress or any other branch of the Government power which is free from the restraints of the Constitution [emphasis added] [emphasis added].” — Reid v. Covert, 1956.
So while patriots have been concerned about "closing the barn door so the horses can't escape," stopping corrupt Congress from using its power to negotiate treaties to limit constitutional rights with the help of the UN, little did we know that one horse had already escaped from the barn in the early 20th century with respect to 10th Amendment-protected water rights, compliments of activist justices.
Regarding the EPA, note that the Founding States had made the first numbered clauses in the Constitution, Sections 1-3 of Article I, evidently a good place to hide them from Congress, to clarify that all federal legislative powers are vested in the elected members of Congress, not in the executive or judicial branches or in non-elected government bureaucrats like those running the EPA. So Congress has a constitutional monopoly on federal legislative / regulatory powers whether it wants it or not imo.
So not only has Congress wrongly delegated legislative powers to non-elected bureaucrats in blatant defiance of Sections 1-3 mentioned above, the EPA in this example, but Congress has delegated powers that the states have never granted to Congress expressly via the Constitution, regulating intrastate water rights in this example.
Also note that the post-17th Amendment Senate should have protected the states by killing the bills which led to the establishment and funding of the EPA. The ill-conceived 17th Amendment needs to disappear, and corrupt senators and Constitution-ignoring EPA bureaucrats along with it.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again—
When the government is LAWLESS, why should the people be LAWFUL?
When certain segments of society can IGNORE the law, why should any other segments OBEY the law?
When certain individuals are ABOVE the law, why should the rest be UNDER the law?
Either the LAW applies to us ALL, or the LAW applies to NO ONE!!!
Well, gee—If the EPA can ignore this judge, I guess Christians can ignore the Supreme Court.
Then how about private citizens that own the land with this water on it step up and defend their property against the EPA? Hold EPA agents at gunpoint if necessary until law enforcement arrives to take them into custody.
In my line of work, I dealt with EPA, and other state agencies for 30 years. I could almost write a book about navigating these sharks and their tactics.