If you didn't find what you were looking for, try a new search!
This appears to be part of a concerted effort to get as many rules and regulations as possible in place by the end of the year,
As a result of the Sackett decision, several types of waters will no longer be under federal jurisdiction, including an estimated 1.2 million to 4.9 million miles of ephemeral streams.
They aim to skip public comment and have a revised WOTUS rule by late September.
The Supreme Court ruling in Sackett v. EPA will have reverberations far beyond the Clean Water Act (CWA).
In one of the most consequential judicial decisions in recent memory, the Supreme Court significantly limited EPA's authority to regulate wetlands under the Clean Water Act (CWA).
"The volume of litigation that has generated from the Clean Water Act over the last decades from the federal district courts, the federal courts of appeals, and the Supreme Court of the United States reveals nothing but chaos and uncertainty.”
Can the feds' puddle power grab be stopped in court?
In Sackett v. EPA arguments will be heard in October, and a ruling is expected early next year.
Ironically, this latest effort to reimpose the heavy hand of the administrative regulatory state on rural America comes when the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the Sackett case which could render the entire issue moot.
Handing a victory to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the court determined that the couple’s land does contain wetlands and thus can be regulated by the agency under the CWA.Handing a victory to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the court determined that the couple’s land does contain wetlands and thus can be regulated by the agency under the CWA.