Supreme Court curtails Clean Water Act

scotusblog.com ^ | 05/25/2023 | Amy Howe

[Bonemaker]

The Supreme Court on Thursday established a more stringent test to determine whether the Clean Water Act applies to a wetland. The ruling was a setback for the Environmental Protection Agency and a victory for an Idaho couple, Michael and Chantell Sackett, who have been battling with the federal government for over 15 years in their efforts to build a house on an empty lot near a large lake.

[Cen-Tejas]

..........well, I hear you!

I guess we have to just take what victories we can and continue to put one foot in front of the other.

For Example: Today we won a big one. Sackett vs EPA.

[CFW]

Schumer is not happy! LOL! It was a 9-0 decision and he refers to the MAGA Court.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/schumer-rips-maga-supreme-court-9-0-vote-epa-waters-rule

“This MAGA Supreme Court is continuing to erode our country’s environmental laws,” Schumer tweeted after the opinion was released. “Make no mistake – this ruling will mean more polluted water, and more destruction of wetlands.”

[MinorityRepublican]

But, cities like Austin lose these Supreme Court battles and go home with their tail between their legs. Then, over the next year or two, they move a few phrases, change some pronunciation, add a phrase or two and then get their Council to rubber stamp a NEW law that pursues the same objective.

Same thing with gun laws in New York. I think the appropriate remedy by the Supreme Court should be a fine. First time the State of New York tries to be "cute", fine them one million. Repeat offenses? Ten million. The Constitution is the law of the land. If the Democrats in New York hate the second amendment that much, they can attempt to amend the Constitution. Or secede.

[fortes fortuna juvat]

Same thing with gun laws in New York. I think the appropriate remedy by the Supreme Court should be a fine. First time the State of New York tries to be “cute”, fine them one million. Repeat offenses? Ten million. The Constitution is the law of the land. If the Democrats in New York hate the second amendment that much, they can attempt to amend the Constitution. Or secede.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I agree, but I believe cases would have to be brought before lower level courts where fines could be levied based on violations of relevant laws. Such judgements could then be appealed by defendants to the higher State and Federal courts, and then possibly up to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Nowadays in this country the failure of states attorneys and the judiciaries to enforce compliance with the law is permitting the country to be torn apart by criminals at every level of society.

[zeugma]

This is a real win for homeowners. Some of the wetland maps were insane...specifically designating man made ponds as wetlands.

Indeed. It is a major curtailment of the EPAs rogue power.(The EPA is freakng out of control)

Here's a direct link to the decision itself:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-454_4g15.pdf

[ridesthemiles]

WHO else would have bought that land under the controls of the EPA????