[NCSteve]

For environmentalists, a loss would strike at the heart of the nation's water resources.

For environmentalists, a loss would strike at the heart of their attempts to gain Marxist control of the nation's water resources.

There, I fixed that sentence for them.

[NewHampshireDuo]

See also http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1581662/posts

[Dems_R_Losers]

My husband is going to Washington to hear the arguments tomorrow. He used to be an EPA lawyer and one of his friends at EPA helped draft the U.S.' brief. Both of them think the government is going to lose the Michigan case.

[inquest]

Just as a side note: This is the sort of the thing we could be in for if the "Law Of the Sea Treaty" (which the Bush administration supports) goes into effect, giving significant UN authority over the world's oceans. How much longer after that would it be "interpreted" to apply also to waters that feed into the oceans, and then to water sources that affect those...

[AZRepublican]

Looking at the Constitution its hard to see where Congress can claim the authority to regulate fresh water within the states. They can on federal property, but any other property only a state can regulate.

Only other way I can see them justifying regulation is if some state activity is causing direct harm to federally owned wetlands and streams they could enforce prohibitation of activities that damage these water courses to preserve them from harm.

[The Cuban]

Shocked! you mean they want the court to interpret the word Navigable to mean Navigable? Say it aint so!!!