{"id":3673,"date":"2023-06-02T15:14:41","date_gmt":"2023-06-02T20:14:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/?p=3673"},"modified":"2023-06-02T15:14:42","modified_gmt":"2023-06-02T20:14:42","slug":"supreme-court-limits-epas-authority-in-victory-for-landowners","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/?p=3673","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court Limits EPA\u2019s Authority in Victory for Landowners"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"data:image\/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns='http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg'%20viewBox='0%200%20370%20247'%3E%3C\/svg%3E\" data-lazy-src=\"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image-24.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"zeen-lazy-load-base zeen-lazy-load wp-image-3674\"\/><noscript><img decoding=\"async\" width=\"696\" height=\"464\" src=\"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image-24.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-3674\" srcset=\"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image-24.png 696w, https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image-24-300x200.png 300w, https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image-24-370x247.png 370w, https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image-24-293x195.png 293w, https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image-24-120x80.png 120w, https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image-24-240x160.png 240w, https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/image-24-390x260.png 390w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 696px) 100vw, 696px\" \/><\/noscript><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously in&nbsp;<em>Sackett v. EPA<\/em>, a case dealing with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency\u2019s (EPA) broad application of the 1972 Clean Water Act to isolated wetlands on private property, that the Clean Water Act does not apply to the Sackett family\u2019s property.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>16-Year Battle Finally Over<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In 2007, the Sackett family began construction of their home on a 0.63-acre vacant lot near Priest Lake, Idaho.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The EPA sent a letter to the Sacketts informing them their lot contained \u201dwetlands\u201d that were \u201cnavigable waters,\u201d and thus were subject to regulation under the CWA. The EPA directed the Sacketts to halt construction until they received a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps), and to replace the soil they had already removed to level their land, or be subject to fines of more than $40,000 per day until a permit was granted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Thus began a 16 year-long legal battle for the Sacketts, including appearing before the U.S. Supreme Court, not once, but twice. The &nbsp;Sacketts\u2019 first Supreme Court victory came in 2012 when the justices&nbsp; ruled they did not have to go through the EPA\u2019s lengthy permitting process before seeking a remedy in federal court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>With this victory in hand, 11 years later, the Sacketts found themselves before the Supreme Court once again, after lower courts, citing previous Supreme Court decisions, found EPA was correct: there was a \u201csignificant nexus\u201d connecting the Sacketts property to waters of the United States and thus they were subject to EPA jurisdiction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Sacketts challenged this decision, asking the Supreme Court to overturn its \u201csignificant nexus\u201d ruling by determining that only wetlands having a direct surface connection to waters of the United States could be regulated by the EPA, which would clearly establish their land is not regulable under the CWA.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Sacketts Prevail<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held the Sacketts\u2019 land was not a jurisdictional wetland and that they could develop their property without further interference by the federal government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>According to the opinion written by Associate Justice Samuel Alito, the EPA classified the Sacketts\u2019 property as waters of the United States (WOTUS) merely because they were near a ditch that intermittently held water that fed a creek, which ran into a nearby navigable lake. Alito said the historic uncertainty surrounding the definition of WOTUS has been a constant issue for the courts and landowners, in large part because it has been broadened over time. He said the EPA even admits that basically every puddle or ditch could fall under their jurisdiction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cBy the EPA\u2019s own admission, nearly all waters and wetlands are potentially susceptible to regulation under this [significant nexus] test, putting a staggering array of landowners at risk of criminal prosecution for such mundane activities as moving dirt,\u201d Alito wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Ending the \u201cSignificant Nexus\u201d Standard<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A five-justice majority went further, agreeing with the late Associate Justice Antonin Scalia\u2019s 2006 plurality opinion in&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.oyez.org\/cases\/2005\/04-1034\"><em>Rapanos v. United States<\/em><\/a><em>,<\/em>&nbsp;where Scalia argued the CWA defined WOTUS as \u201crelatively permanent, standing or flowing bodies of water,\u201d with a \u201ccontinuous surface connection.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This ends the EPA and lower courts\u2019 use of former Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy\u2019s \u201csignificant nexus test\u201d in&nbsp;<em>Rapanos<\/em>, which allowed for a much broader interpretation of what constitutes WOTUS.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This ruling will help other courts decide current and future CWA cases, said Damien Schiff, a senior attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation, one of the attorneys arguing the case, in a press release.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cThe Court\u2019s ruling returns the scope of the Clean Water Act to its original and proper limits,\u201d said Schiff. \u201cCourts now have a clear measuring stick for fairness and consistency by federal regulators. Today\u2019s ruling is a profound win for property rights and the constitutional separation of powers.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cProviding clarity and reducing property owners\u2019 uncertainties concerning the CWA\u2019s scope and limits is one of the most substantial benefits of this ruling,\u201d Jonathan Wood, vice president of law and policy at the Property and Environment Research Center, said in a press release.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cAll nine justices rejected the prior vague standard in favor of relatively narrow understandings of federal authority over private property,\u201d Wood said. \u201cNow that fewer wetlands will be regulatory liabilities for private landowners, it\u2019s time for voluntary conservation efforts to make wetlands an asset to landowners.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Moots Biden\u2019s Water Rule<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This ruling will especially benefit farmers and ranchers, who have historically been targets of expanding EPA powers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Even as&nbsp;<em>Sackett v. EPA<\/em>&nbsp;was being decided in the Supreme Court, the Biden administration\u2019s EPA and Army Corps&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/heartlanddailynews.com\/2023\/03\/west-virginia-leads-coalition-of-24-states-suing-biden-administration-over-expanded-water-rule\/\">rushed through a strict new rule<\/a>&nbsp;regulating WOTUS, which would have greatly expanded the amount of private and state lands considered regulable as waters of the United States.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Attorneys General of 24 states filed suit against the EPA and Army Corps in response, in part, arguing &nbsp;the new rule would force farmers and ranchers to pay high fees just to conduct ordinary business on their own property, if they were able to get permits at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Senate attempted to overturn the new EPA WOTUS rule via a Congressional Review Act joint resolution, but President Joe Biden vetoed the resolution, and the rule went into effect on April 6.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Now, just a few weeks later, much of the rule has been rendered moot by the majority decision in&nbsp;<em>Sackett v. EPA<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>\u2018Welcome News to Farmers\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This ruling by the Supreme Court is great news for those in the domestic agriculture business, Ted McKinney, CEO of the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, said in a press statement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cThe Supreme Court\u2019s unanimous decision in&nbsp;<em>Sackett v. EPA<\/em>&nbsp;today comes as welcome news to farmers, landowners and state departments of agriculture who sought clarity on what has been an over-litigated issue for decades,\u201d McKinney said. \u201cWe take relief in this decision as the justices clearly state the \u2018significant nexus theory is particularly implausible\u2019 and the EPA has no statutory basis to impose the standard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cToday\u2019s ruling proves that protecting our nation\u2019s waterways and growing food, fiber and fuel are two tandem efforts\u2014not two competing interests,\u201d McKinney said. \u201cThere is, however, still work to be done to ensure farmers and ranchers are equipped to best care for their land while following applicable federal or state requirements.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>Linnea Lueken\u00a0<\/em><strong>(<\/strong><a href=\"mailto:llueken@heartland.org\"><strong>llueken@heartland.org<\/strong><\/a><strong>)<\/strong><em>\u00a0is a research fellow with the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy at The Heartland Institute.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Original Article:<a href=\"https:\/\/heartlanddailynews.com\/2023\/06\/supreme-court-limits-epas-authority-in-victory-for-landowners\/\">https:\/\/heartlanddailynews.com\/2023\/06\/supreme-court-limits-epas-authority-in-victory-for-landowners\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously in&nbsp;Sackett v. EPA, a case dealing with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency\u2019s (EPA) broad application of the 1972 Clean Water Act to isolated wetlands on private property, that the Clean Water Act does not apply to the Sackett family\u2019s property. 16-Year Battle Finally Over In 2007, the Sackett family began construction of their home on a 0.63-acre vacant lot near Priest Lake, Idaho. The EPA sent a letter to the Sacketts informing them their [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":40,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3673","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-economy"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3673","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/40"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3673"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3673\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3675,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3673\/revisions\/3675"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3673"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3673"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3673"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}