4 ms·
Congress passed the Clean Water Act which literally included "estuarine zones". The Supreme Court cynically said Congress hadn't meant wetlands with that synony
by CalChris 3y ago
Congress passed the Clean Water Act which literally included "estuarine zones". The Supreme Court cynically said Congress hadn't meant wetlands with that synonym. So yeah, the Supreme Court or Alito, Roberts, Thomas, Gorsuch and Barrett are at fault.
BTW, the opinion literally quotes the term "estuarine waters" which is a phrase never used in the Clean Water Act. Basically, the majority opinion is lying.
- rufus_foreman 3y ago>> the opinion literally quotes the term "estuarine waters" which is a phrase never used in the Clean Water Act The opinion cites §1330(g)(4)(C)(vii) ("estuarine waters"), looks like that is from an amendment to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (which is the official name for the Clean Water Act), https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/PLAW/114/public/PLAW-114publ162.xml https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/PLAW/114/public/PLAW-114pub...: "To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to reauthorize the National Estuary Program, and for other purposes" ... "(vii) low dissolved oxygen conditions in estuarine waters and related nutrient management."
- rascul 3y ago> So yeah, the Supreme Court or Alito, Roberts, Thomas, Gorsuch and Barrett are at fault. You forgot Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson. The decision was unanimous.
- CalChris 3y agoThe 2023 case Sackett v. EPA II narrowing the Environmental Protection Act to not include wetlands was decided 5-4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sackett_v._Environmental_Protection_Agency_(2023) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sackett_v._Environmental_Prote...
- ars 3y agoNot exactly: "The court voted unanimously to reverse the Ninth Circuit, but split 5–4 on the rationale."