Posted on 05/26/2023 10:20:07 AM PDT by lasereye
The Supreme Court on Thursday finally ended one of the most brazen examples of bureaucratic tyranny in modern times.
Naturally, liberals were outraged and warned that curbing federal power will doom the environment.
Congress enacted the Clean Water Act in 1972 to prevent pollution of the nation’s waterways.
In subsequent years, federal judges decided the law also applied to adjacent wetlands, since they could contribute to pollution.
But “What is a wetland?” is the DC version of “How many angels can dance on a pinhead?”
Since 1972, federal agencies have changed the definition of wetlands jurisdiction 13 times.
Up to 100 million private acres fall under federal sway, depending on the definition of wetlands (which could be dry 300 days a year).
Because the Clean Water Act imposes strict criminal liability, farmers plowing their own fields can be treated like midnight dumpers heaving barrels of dioxin into a river.
Thursday’s decision settled the case of Michael and Chantell Sackett, who started building a home on the small vacant lot they purchased for $23,000 in 2005 in a residential subdivision near Priest Lake, Idaho.
After they began backfilling the lot to build a house, the Environmental Protection Agency shocked them by preliminarily classifying their property as a wetland and threatening a $ 75,000-a-day fine unless construction ceased.
The Sacketts were prohibited from challenging the EPA edict until the agency issued a final ruling — which EPA endlessly delayed.
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled in 2012 the Clean Water Act was not “uniquely designed to enable the strong-arming of [property owners] into ‘voluntary compliance’ without the opportunity for judicial review.’’
Justice Antonin Scalia mocked EPA’s definition of wetlands, noting the Sacketts had never “seen a ship or other vessel cross their yard.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
President Donald Trump groused in 2017 that Obama’s EPA wetlands rule could apply to “nearly every puddle or every ditch on a farmer’s land or everywhere else that they decide,” which he labeled “a massive power grab.”
In 2020, the Trump administration issued new wetlands regulations that the Biden administration nullified in 2021.
How about that family gets $75,000 per day since their construction was stopped by the edict?
More here:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4156071/posts
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4155970/posts
😂👍
SCOTUS strikes a “blow” to the EPA.
I’m sure they will obey. Just another parasite agency screwing over the American people.
Anybody got an accurate definition of “tyranny” in the United States?
Hint: Closely related to the accurate definition of “Deep State” AKA “Swamp”.
Anyone?
Needs to be called what it is: fascism.
We have been fascist a very long time. The very definition is private ownership subject to endless laws and how it will be used.
IOW, communism lite. Fake ownership.
Should have also Recycled it ,LOL
Look at this ruling....but pay more attention to your local wetland laws....and the maps that are on the record...with many of them blatantly wrong.
Scalia is perfect
Say thanks Tricky Dick
I watched a ‘This Old House’ episode where the home was next to a river and the homeowner was told by some local gov’t dept they could not develop the land from 100ft from the river..... It was just land with trees spaced apart. The home was further up the hill. They were only allowed to remove what was considered evasive plants.
100ft of their property was off limits.
I bet though they had to pay property taxes on the land they had no control over.
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.