Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A weak defense of EPA
Scotusblog ^ | Jan 9 2012 | Lyle Denniston

Posted on 01/10/2012 8:11:44 AM PST by WilliamIII

With a federal government lawyer conceding almost every criticism leveled at the way the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency compels landowners to avoid polluting the nation’s waterways, the Supreme Court on Monday seemed well on its way toward finding some way to curb that agency’s enforcement powers. Their task was made easier as Deputy U.S. Solicitor General Malcolm L. Stewart stopped just short of saying that EPA was just as heavy-handed as its adversaries — and several of the Justices — were saying.

Perhaps the most telling example: when several of the Justices expressed alarm that a homeowner targeted by EPA’s efforts might face a penalty of as much as $37,500 each day of alleged violation, Stewart made it clear that the fine actually might be doubled, to $75,000 a day, although he tried to recover by saying that was only “theoretical,” and that he did not think that EPA had ever taken that step.

The argument in Sackett, et al., v. EPA (docket 10-1062) did not appear to portend a slam-dunk loss for EPA during the first half of Monday’s argument, when the lawyer for an Idaho couple faced quite rigorous questioning about whether the couple had exercised options that might have been open to them to avert the dire consequences of EPA enforcement. But the tenor of the session changed abruptly as soon as the line of argument chosen by EPA’s lawyer, Stewart, unfolded.

It all came to something of an explosive verbal climax when Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., suggested that the scheme that Stewart had outlined would be considered by the ordinary homeowner as something that “can’t happen in the United States.”

(Excerpt) Read more at scotusblog.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: bloodoftyrants; crushepa; epa; epacorruption; epajackboots; govtabuse; lping; sackett; scotus; tyranny

1 posted on 01/10/2012 8:11:45 AM PST by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

That was a fun read. Thanks!


2 posted on 01/10/2012 8:22:39 AM PST by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., suggested that the scheme that Stewart had outlined would be considered by the ordinary homeowner as something that “can’t happen in the United States.”

Hey Sammy...and we got a Kenyan/Indonesian guy in the White House.....something that “can’t happen in the United States"....?

3 posted on 01/10/2012 8:24:45 AM PST by spokeshave (Ron Paul finally lit a match after dousing himself with gasoline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
While it appears Scotus may trim the EPA’s wings, let's not forget the EPA has the power it has because of Congress and Zero.

Pester your rep and Senators to get control over the administrative monsters they created.

4 posted on 01/10/2012 8:33:42 AM PST by Jacquerie (No court will save us from ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

Looks like the EPA is going to get slammed in the decision. It’s about time!


5 posted on 01/10/2012 8:34:51 AM PST by Timber Rattler (Just say NO! to RINOS and the GOP-E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

There is another dimension to this.

An associate purchased a home in a subdivision only to discover that the surface storm drainage from some adjacent lots ran across his back yard. As he researched his remediation options, he found that this ditch was marked as a dashed blue line on the USGS topographical map. It turns out that this also means the Army Corps of Engineers has jurisdiction over this “navigable waterway”. So, he talked to the local Corps office and they informed him that he could apply to have his remediation plan approved by them, and that he could not otherwise modify the waterway in any manner. To top this off, his plan would have to be submitted by an approved engineer. When he researched that demand, he found that their fees for the “study” they would have to perform and document would start at $10,000.

He was also told that the Corp regularly opposes such plans.

Land of the Free? Not any longer.


6 posted on 01/10/2012 8:35:05 AM PST by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat
What you described is a common occurrence in low lying Florida. There is no constitutional justification.
7 posted on 01/10/2012 8:39:32 AM PST by Jacquerie (No court will save us from ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

If I’m reading the stories on this right, the EPA tried to say they were the only arbiters of this case and the owners had no right to challenge them in court, and then threatened them with harsher penalties if they tried. Am I missing something?


8 posted on 01/10/2012 8:40:30 AM PST by LevinFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler

I wouldn’t count my chickens before they hatch.

Statements by the Judges and their verdict may not be the same.

Even if the Sacketts win this-—will it slow down the atrocities of the EPA? They are still closing coal plants and coal fired electric generation plants, and I would bet that everyone who has faced what the Sacketts are facing will still be facing an agency that is running wild.

No one is going to remove the head of the agency, no one is going to get fired from the agency , and even a ruling against the EPA will not amount to squat.


9 posted on 01/10/2012 8:42:08 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Americas Government Is Preying On Her People


Click The Pic To Donate

Support The Resistance

10 posted on 01/10/2012 8:43:44 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

The EPA clearly violates the U.S. Constitution concerning due process and eminent domain.

If the government wants private land for a nature preserve, they should pay the otherwise going market rate for it AFTER due process. However, the EPA simply declares that YOU must maintain your land as a nature preserve and continue to cover all associated costs of keeping it to EPA specifications. Henry VIII had more restraints on action concerning private lands than the EPA now has.


11 posted on 01/10/2012 9:08:07 AM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler

Supreme Court kick some EPA rear end here. But don’t forget EPA lied and presented FRAUDULENT AGW/IPCC CO2 DATA to influence your decision in ruling CO2 a dangerous pollutant. DON’T LET THESE SOCIALIST DEMOCRAT FRAUDS GET AWAY WITH THIS.


12 posted on 01/10/2012 9:11:26 AM PST by spawn44 (NSWWER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat
This government control over our private property (land) started when many Americans looked the other way and many even embraced local “zoning control” because they were lied to about [keeping their property values high.”

How has that zoning control worked in cities like Deadtroit?

Americans are just beginning to reap what has been sowed for more than forty (40) years.

13 posted on 01/10/2012 9:17:26 AM PST by paratrooper82 (We are kicking Ass in Afghanistan, soon we will be home to kick some more Asses in Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Venturer
They are still closing coal plants and coal fired electric generation plants

Yup. And even if a Republican is elected president and even if those EPA regulations are rescinded, it will be too late. Dozens of plants will have already been shut down and the damage to our power supply begun.

None of us can afford not to vote in the upcoming election -- no matter how we may detest the eventual nominee.

14 posted on 01/10/2012 9:24:35 AM PST by BfloGuy (The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: LevinFan

Am I missing something?

I wish you were. Unfortunately, it’s as bad as you suggest.


15 posted on 01/10/2012 9:33:59 AM PST by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
EPA, one of the current out of control government agencies similar to the Gestapo.
16 posted on 01/10/2012 9:39:21 AM PST by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat

The unfortunate reality of the 21st century in America is that the government can do what ever they want. If they want to take your property to give it to someone else or simply render it worthless, they will. They can and will arrest and imprison you for any reason or no reason at all. The police can kick in your door at any time and for any or no reason, kill your pets and drag you away to prison. You have little or no recourse and no chance of recovering damages from such abuse.

There are dozens of threads right here on FR about just these things happening all over the country.


17 posted on 01/10/2012 10:11:58 AM PST by Chuckster (The longer I live the less I care about what you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]




We wish it grew there
Please Donate Monthly
Sponsors will donate $10 for each new monthly sign-up

18 posted on 01/10/2012 10:28:54 AM PST by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII; Army Air Corps; ApplegateRanch; Berlin_Freeper; SolitaryMan; golux; SteamShovel; ...
 


Beam me to Planet Gore !

19 posted on 01/10/2012 11:16:12 AM PST by steelyourfaith (If it's "green" ... it's crap !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spawn44
Supreme Court kick some EPA rear end here. But don’t forget EPA lied and presented FRAUDULENT AGW/IPCC CO2 DATA to influence your decision in ruling CO2 a dangerous pollutant. DON’T LET THESE SOCIALIST DEMOCRAT FRAUDS GET AWAY WITH THIS.

Lying and presenting fraudulent data has been a common practice within the EPA since at least the Clinton era. nothing that comes from them can be trusted as it all has a political bias and has always had one. It needs to be made to go bye-bye.

20 posted on 01/10/2012 2:48:34 PM PST by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat
Army Corps of Engineers has jurisdiction over this “navigable waterway”

This is another BS thing EPA has done in the last few years. They redefined "navigable waterways" to include ditches, many which sit dry most of the year.

I have one that cuts my property in half. It was a ditch when I bought the place. How does the US Government have the right to change the definition after the fact and redefine the rules associated with affected properties? The mere definition of "navigable waterway" applied to a ditch that isn't even 4 feet wide or deep is ludicrous. It is a man made drainage ditch, created for the purpose of drainage. It is not a natural stream.

21 posted on 01/10/2012 3:47:38 PM PST by SteamShovel (Smart Grid is Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SteamShovel

Ask them what kind of craft can ‘navigate’ your waterway )ditch).

Ask for pictures.


22 posted on 01/10/2012 5:46:27 PM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson