Supreme Court considers whether to regulate farm plowing

Sac Bee ^ | 12/10/02 | Mark Sherman

[NormsRevenge]

WASHINGTON(AP) - Supreme Court justices found themselves Tuesday in the "guck" - in one justice's word - of trying to determine whether a farmer's plowing can be regulated.

Legal arguments shared court time with a discussion of farming implements in the case of a California farmer who is challenging $500,000 in fines and an order to restore four acres of wetlands.

[BOBWADE]

ping

[Libertarianize the GOP]

bump

[IncredibleHulk]

Actually, this is a property rights issue and is central to who owns the land.

[lawdog]

"We could have avoided this suit if he had just avoided the wetlands area."

Here's the crux of it ding dong. Is it his land or not ? Where is the Constitutional power granted to the Army Corps of Engineers defined ? Article 1, 2 or 3 or ?

[joesnuffy]

Gotta protect the four peckered wood tick

[farmfriend]

Thanks for the ping. I didn't get to read my Bee this morning.

[farmfriend]

ping

[gov_bean_ counter]

I doubt very seriously he did the plowing during the winter, when the area was wet. Where I grew up in LA (Lower Alabama) a weeks worth of rain would be enough to keep tractors out of the fields.

Given that, I think some of this is driven by a liberal definition of "wetlands" based on the current Chief of Engineers' over the top devotion to "the environment".

[farmfriend]

Hey Granger.

[FreedomCalls]

Remember the debate from late in the Clinton administration? They claimed that the Feds had jurisdiction over any puddle of water that a migratory bird could possibly land in. They included mud puddles formed after rainstorms as "wetlands."

[FreedomCalls]

Remember the debate from late in the Clinton administration? They claimed that the Feds had jurisdiction over any puddle of water that a migratory bird could possibly land in. They included mud puddles formed after rainstorms as "wetlands."

[zip]

It's not the government's land. I just want to know where the Constitution states that individuals cannot own land. Damn "greenies".

[spunkets]

"Jeffrey P. Minear, assistant to the solicitor general, said deep plowing at the Borden Ranch throughout the 1990s punctured a patchwork of swales at the bottom of the area's hills and polluted them by churning up clay and soil. "

Polluted it with what, the same stuff that was already there in the first place? A swale is a low area that floods when the ground won't soak up the rain quickly enough. How do you puncture a low area in the ground? These leftists just make stuff up!

[TYVets]

Again, The 9th United States Circuit Court of Appeals is in the news.

Is it possible to get a change of venue, to escape these Irrational Radical Left Wing Extremists ( IRLWE )?

[BOBWADE]

I hope the SCOTUS puts an end to this crap and restores landowners rights.

[APBaer]

This is my plow, it is not my "tool."
My plow is small, my "tool"....
er better not go there.

[AF68]

Gotta protect the four peckered wood tick.

To the detriment of the Hairy-Chested Nutscratcher.

[DB]

Who's freeking property is it! The government's our the person who purchased the rights to it?

[bigfootbob]

"I hope the SCOTUS puts an end to this crap and restores landowners rights."

Ditto to that. The plowing in question used to be done all the time out here, but has been curtailed because of the hysteria associated with "critical" areas. It will be close. It will be a huge blow to property rights if the farmer doesn't prevail.