Participating in the filing are the attorneys general from the states of Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming.
This is another one to watch to see if the NWO bunch make more headway into our sovereignty.
Why not all 50 states?
Emailing Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, why are we not in on this?
.
Just ignore it if your state doesn’t want it.
The U.S. Supreme Legislature will simply rewrite the law to meet the needs of fedgov. Then you’ve thrown your lot in with them and they’ll screw you.
Ignore it.
The EPA needs to be eliminated.
Should be 58.
The EPA regional wetland maps are at the bottom of this page. Virtually the entire country is “wetland”
http://science.house.gov/epa-maps-state-2013#overlay-context
[[( 13 ) States file lawsuit against EPA’s ‘Waters of the U.S.’ rule]]
And just who are they going to take the case to? The ‘supreme’ court? Gee, that aughta go well for the states- the ‘supreme’ court being all like objective and all-
This one will go up to the Supreme Court, where who knows what will happen.
On the one hand, they’ve told the EPA before that it has overstepped its bounds. On the other, the laws can be twisted to mean anything.
I sometimes think that, in an imprecise way, our legal system has reached the more formal mathematical limit limit Godel talked about when he proved that within a mathematical system, propositions could arise which could neither be proved nor disproved.
U.S. Constitution - Amendment 10
- Powers of the States and People
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
If the EPA workload is such that they need to continually invent new problems to solve then they are WAY overstaffed.
However, the enviros still want to wrest control of land. One approach had been to declare these ephemeral ponds a component of interstate commerce. For example, use by ducks and other migratory birds. The new proposed rule goes much further:
Consistent with this view, the agencies now propose to continue to exert jurisdiction over, inter alia, “other waters” that are geographically isolated and even seldom, if ever, hydrologically connected, but are nevertheless “biologically connected to each other and to downstream waters through the movement of seeds, macroinvertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals.”
http://www.paulhastings.com/docs/default-source/PDFs/epa-an--the-corps-seek-to-reclaim-jurisdiction-over-waters.pdf
I thought Nevada and Arizona were deserts?