I don’t thing the current Supreme Court is going to rollback federal regulatory capability of streams and rivers (which is where the fish actually are). The cur

I don’t thing the current Supreme Court is going to rollback federal regulatory capability of streams and rivers (which is where the fish actually are). The current case in questions, and the legal issue involved revolves around the question whether the federal law granting the federal government ability to regulate “waters of the United States” was also meant to enable the executive to regulate wetlands that are not actually connected to any navigable waters. In any case, even if Supreme Court reinterprets the existing law more narrowly than the federal executive had, the federal legislative will still be able to pass new legislation to grant the executive all these capabilities right back. This case is better thought of in terms of limiting the ability of administrative state to promulgate new, substantial laws, rather than the ability to regulate the waters or wetlands themselves.