More Thoughts on Sackett v. EPA In a rare unanimous decision issued on March 21, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that property owners and other regulated parties can challenge administrative compliance orders issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the federal Clean Water Act (CWA). The case involves the attempt a pair of Idaho landowners to challenge an EPA compliance order requiring them to take remedial action in response to alleged wetlands violations or face civil penalties of $75,000 per day. View Full Post
Last week the United States Supreme Court handed a decisive win to property owners battling to protect their due process rights against baseless environmental regulation. In Sackett v. EPA, the Sacketts were denied their due process rights when they attempted to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) determination that the Sackett property was encumbered with wetlands. View Full Post
As we touched in a previous episode of LXBN TV, and have seen numerous LXBN authors explain, Sackett v. EPA is a case that could have a very big impact on the EPA’s enforcement authority. Earlier this week the court ruled unanimously against the EPA; in plain terms, this means that EPA must allow judicial review of enforcement orders issued pursuant to its authority under the Clean Water Act. View Full Post
Oral arguments took place last week in Sackett v. EPA, a Supreme Court case that could have a major impact on the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority. If the EPA loses the case, in which an Idaho couple is challenging an EPA order identifying their land as “protected wetlands” and were halted from building a house on the property, it could potentially lose its ability to issue enforcement orders under the Clean Water Act without those orders being subject to judicial review. View Full Post