• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Conservatives on SCOTUS rewrite Clean Water Act

K1052

K1052

Elite Member

Supreme Court weakens EPA power to enforce Clean Water Act​


https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ocial&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=wp_main

The Supreme Court on Thursday cut back the power of the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate the nation’s wetlands and waterways, another setback for the agency’s authority to combat pollution.
At issue was the reach of the landmark, 51-year-old Clean Water Act and how courts should determine what count as “waters of the United States” under protection of the law. Nearly two decades ago, the court ruled that wetlands are protected by the Clean Water Act if they have a “significant nexus” to regulated waters. Property rights and business groups wanted to narrow regulations to wetlands and other areas directly connected to “navigable waters” such as rivers and lakes.


But Justice Samuel A. Alito, writing for the majority in the 5 to 4 opinion, said the EPA’s interpretation of its powers went too far

“We hold that the CWA extends to only those wetlands with a continuous surface connection to bodies that are ‘waters of the United States’ in their own right, so that they are ‘indistinguishable’ from those waters,” Alito wrote, quoting from past court opinions.
Click to expand...

Utterly preposterous and totally ignores black letter law but what else can you expect from Alito and these other assholes.

When even Kavanaugh is like "WTF?" the line is pretty far behind you. It is hard to overstate the extent to which SCOTUS has essentially taken over the role of Congress and is effectively ruling the country.

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh wrote separately to object to the majority’s reading of the law. He wrote that the majority’s new test “departs from the statutory text, from 45 years of consistent agency practice, and from this Court’s precedents” and will have “significant repercussions for water quality and flood control throughout the United States.” Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson joined Kavanaugh.
Click to expand...
 
Ah yes, the important right to poison the water. I am truly glad for the calvin ball scotus defending freedom and prevent the evil government from stopping water pollution. Because as well know when you pollute the water in a given location as long as you can't see the water on the ground the pollution goes nowhere.

Also fuck the fucking fucks who brought this bullshit forward in the first place.
 
K1052 said:

Supreme Court weakens EPA power to enforce Clean Water Act​


https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ocial&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=wp_main



Utterly preposterous and totally ignores black letter law but what else can you expect from Alito and these other assholes.

When even Kavanaugh is like "WTF?" the line is pretty far behind you. It is hard to overstate the extent to which SCOTUS has essentially taken over the role of Congress and is effectively ruling the country.
Click to expand...
More legal Calvinball. What’s most interesting is Alito’s opinion seems to state that he thinks some elements of the Clean Water Act are bad and therefore he has to limit it. It’s very clear that at this point he views the Supreme Court as some sort of super Congress that can and should rewrite laws he personally disagrees with.
 
fskimospy said:
More legal Calvinball. What’s most interesting is Alito’s opinion seems to state that he thinks some elements of the Clean Water Act are bad and therefore he has to limit it. It’s very clear that at this point he views the Supreme Court as some sort of super Congress that can and should rewrite laws he personally disagrees with.
Click to expand...
More justification for expanding the court.
 
fskimospy said:
More legal Calvinball. What’s most interesting is Alito’s opinion seems to state that he thinks some elements of the Clean Water Act are bad and therefore he has to limit it. It’s very clear that at this point he views the Supreme Court as some sort of super Congress that can and should rewrite laws he personally disagrees with.
Click to expand...

Yes, Alito seems to think we elected him king or something.
 
fskimospy said:
I think he’s realized he can rewrite whatever laws he wants and no one will stop him.

Funny how guys who used to claim they were all about the plain text of the statute abandon that as soon as the plain text tells them something they don’t want to hear.
Click to expand...

I mean that in an even broader sense since besides how he wields power he thinks he should be respected and exist in a realm above criticism.
 
fskimospy said:
More legal Calvinball. What’s most interesting is Alito’s opinion seems to state that he thinks some elements of the Clean Water Act are bad and therefore he has to limit it. It’s very clear that at this point he views the Supreme Court as some sort of super Congress that can and should rewrite laws he personally disagrees with.
Click to expand...
Remember when conservatives used to complain about legislating from the bench? Apparently they didn't really mean that either.
 
Alito and Thomas are just utter ghouls and should go play in traffic. Gorsuch is there too. Roberts is a piece of shit, maybe not a ghoul, but he is working on it.
 
fskimospy said:
I think he’s realized he can rewrite whatever laws he wants and no one will stop him.

Funny how guys who used to claim they were all about the plain text of the statute abandon that as soon as the plain text tells them something they don’t want to hear.
Click to expand...

This is probably why Biden doesn't just invoke the 14th amendment. It pretty obviously means what it says, but that doesn't matter with these guys.
 
Gorsuch was likely the swing vote. Given his past opinions I’m not surprised he sided with industry, but I wonder what fringe benefits he’ll earn for this ruling.
 
brycejones said:
More justification for expanding the court.
Click to expand...
Yes. 2-3 days ago I saw video on TV news of Barbara Lee advocating for just that and I may have to vote for her to take Feinstein's Senate seat. It's a shame because she's my representative, but she may have far more important things to do. I'm confident my district will elect a qualified replacement for Lee. Republicans don't stand the ghost of a chance here. Thinking out loud, Schiff and Porter do stand in her way.
 
Last edited:
When diagnosed with pancreatic cancer you live about three months.
And it's a terrible three months.
Just a reminder, Clarence....
 
This is why East Palestine was so ironic. These people vote for every politician who'll reduce environmental regulations, then when inevitable disaster happens somewhere, blame the side that tried to prevent them. Let them sit in the toxic pool their votes created for all I care.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top