Supreme Court rules 9-0 against EPA over wetlands

Page 1 of 2  
Justice Alito: "The position taken in this case by the Federal Governmenta position that the Court now squarely rejectswould have put the property rights of ordinary Americans entirely at the mercy of Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) employees."
You can now have a wading pool in your backyard without worrying over a $75,000/day fine.
http://volokh.com/2012/03/21/unanimous-supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-property-owners-in-sackett-v-epa/
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/21/2012 2:01 PM, HeyBub wrote:

http://volokh.com/2012/03/21/unanimous-supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-property-owners-in-sackett-v-epa / The SC ruled that property owners have the right to contest the EPA's ruling that their property falls under the Clean Water Act. They now get to have their day in court. That's all this ruling gave them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And when your kid pees in the pool it no longer automatically qualifies as a Superfund site?
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
That probably initiates the superfund designation.
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .
And when your kid pees in the pool it no longer automatically qualifies as a Superfund site?
--
Tegger



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

poop.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I heard that French babies fart Dijon mustard gas.
Or is it Grey Poupon?
--
Tegger

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

ROTFLOL. ;-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Italian: Poopaeroni German: Pooperschnitzel English: Tea and poopets Iraq: Muslim suicide pooper
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .

I heard that French babies fart Dijon mustard gas.
Or is it Grey Poupon?
--
Tegger



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There's a reason they call it "projectile"...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Don't knock mustard gas. It started chemotherapy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_cancer_chemotherapy
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/22/2012 6:50 PM, Han wrote:

Let me guess, an observant physician noticed that mustard gas victims were cancer free? ^_^
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

At the link: The beginnings of the modern era of cancer chemotherapy can be traced directly to the discovery of nitrogen mustard, a chemical warfare agent, as an effective treatment for cancer. Two pharmacologists, Louis S. Goodman and Alfred Gilman, were recruited by the United States Department of Defense to investigate potential therapeutic applications of chemical warfare agents. A year into the start of their research a German air raid in Bari, Italy led to the exposure of more than one thousand people to the SS John Harvey's secret cargo composed of mustard gas bombs. Dr. Stewart Francis Alexander, a Lieutenant Colonel who was an expert in chemical warfare, was subsequently deployed to investigate the aftermath. Autopsies of the victims suggested that profound lymphoid and myeloid suppression had occurred after exposure. In his report Dr. Alexander theorized that since mustard gas all but ceased the division of certain types of Somatic cells whose nature it was to divide fast, it could also potentially be put to use in helping to suppress the division of certain types of cancerous cells.[1]
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So, maybe Sadam was really trying to find a cure for cancer?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in news:cbc7999e-

If Saddam hadn't used CBW in the past, I doubt the WMD question could have risen up as far as it did and we might never have gone to war with them. His past use of CBW made the threat more "vibrant."
There might have been an overall *eventual* benefit for the Kurds. Depends on how they perceive their current state of affairs. As for the Iranians - they probably just died without much overall future benefit.
Ever cloud has a silver lining, every tornado contains a lot of loose change.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Han wrote:

They damn sure didn't die from cancer! QED.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And a biggee it is. That case has gone on for a couiple years now at least. It is almost in my back yard (only 50miles away). the back story is couple buys vacant land, Starts to build house, Fills in a low spot and flit hits the shan. EPA says it it wet lands. Owners say it isn't but then have no right to haul EPA to court and make them prove it is wet lands, EPAs word is thethe thaw and that ends everything.
From day one, all the owners wanted was a day in court to make their case.
I'm surprised it had to go to the Supremes before that decision was made.
By the time it got there, the fines had built to astonomical levels.
Harry K
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Harry K wrote:

In the majority opinion, Justice Scalia commented "Wet lands? The plaintiffs in this case testified that they never once saw a boat or vessel cross their property."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The whole point of the case is that EPA claims it is wet-lands, owner says it isn't and under the current (or what was current) there was no way to force the EPA to justify there claim.
Basically it was:
"we say it is wet, stop building and remove the fill".
anybody recognize jackbooted thugs in that? I suspect that the owners will lose but at least now they'll get their day in court.
Harry K
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Back when the EPA first sstarted, they would rule 'wetland' if htere was a puddle of water on it at any time of year. My a a neighbor got our tit in the wringer over a grove of Willow trees we removed. WETLANDS they screamed. Reality? A spring on one end of the 10 acre plot with the rest being a spring time drain from feild run-offm read stream running through that was dry 10 all summer/fall. We lost.
Harry K
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Elbrecht wrote:

Woe! My bad.
The statement was not part of the decision; Scalia's statement was part of the oral arguments:
"Justice Antonin Scalia, speaking in the courtroom, mocked the EPA's view that the Sacketts' small lot was protected by federal law as part of the 'navigable waters' of the United States. The couple, 'never having seen a ship or other vessel cross their yard,' questioned that their lot was a wetland, Scalia said, and they are entitled to a civil hearing before the agency to contest the EPA's jurisdiction over their property. "
http://www.tulsaworld.com/site/printerfriendlystory.aspx?articleid 120322_32_E4_WSIGOh2439&PrintComments=1
I apologize for the mistake and for sending you on a wild chicken chase.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.