Skip to comments.The EPA Had a Bad Day at the Supreme Court
Posted on 01/10/2012 7:50:42 PM PST by WilliamIII
Yesterday the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency. At issue is whether the EPAs use of administrative compliance orders, which are essentially government commands issued to property owners, should be subject to judicial review under the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. In other words, when the EPA tells a homeowner to stop building because of a possible violation of the Clean Water Act, does that homeowner have the right to promptly challenge the EPA in court? As Robert Barnes observes in The Washington Post, Justices across the ideological spectrum appeared troubled by the EPAs position that Mike and Chantell Sackett do not have the right to go court to challenge the agencys wetlands decision. Barnes continues:
The government has said the EPAs power to issue compliance orders, with its threats of huge fines, is a way to quickly move to stop environmental damage. Allowing polluters to go to court would tie up the agency in litigation.
But several justices seemed to agree with the Sackettss lawyer, Damien M. Schiff of the Pacific Legal Foundation, that those subject to the EPA orders should not have to wait for the agency to decide whether to go to court.
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
Good for the comeuppance.
Can't think of anyone that deserves it more.
My message for the libs is that you REALLY, REALLY don't want to live in a world with no rules or arbitrary rules. Rules (some rules) are good.
No rules means I win. I'm faster, smarter, and better armed. And in a world with no rules... that's all that counts.
Due process? What century is the author living in?
Yeah; and how's this consistent with Executive Orders and their implementation?
Yeah, it’s quaint, isn’t it?
Anybody know how the”wise Latina” ruled?
There should be a taxpayer ombudsman that literally attacks government when it goes outside it’s Constitutional bounds.
Think government gadfly.
Repub nominee needs to campaign on cutting EPA budget in half and rewriting their charter.
We can have clean air and water without the gestapo tactics used to discourage and shutter industry and growth.
Couple years ago the NOAA discovered that a single-woman biz in Florida was selling a coral product (in a list of hundreds of products) without a license:
2 DOZEN agents in kooky nijya outfits did a dynamic entry on her house with machine-guns.
They kicked over stuff, zip-tied her, ran around screaming in her ear.
Alice in Wonderland.
Did u know the Dept of Education now ALSO has a *SWAT team?* I’m serious.
They heard oral arguments. They will deliberate next. They wont rule for a couple of months
No ruling for months yet.
How’s this for justice? Make the EPA build their house as planned, and pay for it out of the EXECUTIVE’S paychecks.
My bad, I thought the court ruled already.
Ok, then anyone wanna guess how the wise Latina will rule?
“when it goes outside its Constitutional bounds”...
Good luck with that. The truth is the majority of government operates outside its constitutional bounds these days.
Time for the EPA to eat their peas.
Congress could help in these cases by enacting Loser Pays.
Yes, you’re correct.
These ‘police forces’ are part of the corruption in Constitutional government that the CSIS and Rand Corporation created when they developed the idea of a ‘homeland security’ branch of the federal government.
They created ‘homeland security’ as a means of generating money for themselves, as they are paid to develop ideas like deputizing all departments of the executive branch, and then are paid to implement them.
In no way can a country be free, if every government office has its own police force and the directive to implement whatever regulation they want and enforce compliance themselves.
NOAA is particularly offensive, as a wind and weather monitoring group, they now implement international law through regulatory compliance, and they have armed deputies who can shoot and kill you if you disturb the birds in the ‘marine sanctuary’.
Right now they are trying to run the United States Coast Guard off their base near the pier in Monterey and force them to move away from the water so that NOAA can take over the prime real estate location. They have support from Congressman Sam Farr, who I have no doubt will make this happen.
It’s a nightmare.
What we need to do is to force Congress to define the penalties for each act against the Constitution, so if these bureaucrats are accused and convicted, there is no question of evading penalty. It should include fines on individuals, jail time, prison time and in extreme cases the death penalty, I suppose.
The lack of penalty for wrong doing is one reason, I believe, that we have such an out of control government.
This should be a unanimous decision reversing the Ninth Circus and ruling for the People over the bureaucrats. Hopefully, we get a broad ruling aimed at the all of the unelected minions in the federal government.
I had no idea, wow —I rollerblade and dive there all the time.
I sometimes played frisbee with some of the CG dudes there.
I’m so disappointed to hear this.
NOAA already has a large and fancy facility near the lighthouse on Asilomar, in the dunes near Spanish Bay.
The way they’ve decorated it with art you would NEVER guess they’re ecp storm-troopers, but then again maybe that’s the idea.
They took over the bottom floor of the dormitory last year, and some of the offices in the Comm center.
But they won’t be happy until they have the whole facility.
They are the most arrogant and anti-human ‘public servants’ I ever met.
“The EPA Had a Bad Day at the Supreme Court”
We can hope, one in a long string of bad days especially starting at the beginning of next year.
Some years ago the local municipal golf course was planning some alterations, and I played the course one day and got to see the pink flags sticking out of puddles. Well, maybe a big and persistent puddle along the edge of one fairway, but believe me it was no more than a puddle. Even so that pink flag made it a kingdom, unless I was seeing the whole thing wrong.
US Supreme Court Justice Scalia wrote the following commentary in his delivered Opinion for the case Printz v. United States (95-1478), 521 U.S. 898 (1997)
[My bold above]
Looks as if this is going to be another slap-down for the EPA and the greenazis infesting it!
It’s interesting that Breyer has qualms after being one of five liberal/swing votes in Kelo that gave government expansive powers. That didn’t work out too well, maybe he noticed.
If so, why not just fold those functions back into Interior and close EPA down ?
17,384 EPA employees on the bread line sounds fine to me .. (2010 numbers ,, probably at least 20% higher now)
Newt already has and does. He’s for abolishing it and creating something else (with new people) which has less control.