4 ms·
It's worth noting that a recent Supreme Court decision, Sackett v EPA, has somewhat curtailed the more... creative wetland designations. https://www.supremecou
by aifooh7Keew6xoo 3y ago
It's worth noting that a recent Supreme Court decision, Sackett v EPA, has somewhat curtailed the more... creative wetland designations.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-454_4g15.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-454_4g15.pdf
It's actually kind of disgusting how transparently the EPA has been playing their hand to maximize exploitable/monetizable authority and jurisdictional area without regard for real environmental concerns, development impact, or indeed their own legal mandate.
There's absolutely an element of that organization that doesn't care either way what happens to the environment or community, they just want infinite authority under the guise of environmental protection so that you to have a reason to bribe them.
- downWidOutaFite 3y ago> maximize exploitable/monetizable authority and jurisdictional area You're implying corruption for monetary gain, that is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence.