Could the Court treat Justice Powell's Bakke opinion the way it treated Justice Kennedy's Rapanos opinion?
Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act decision was a unanimous win for the Sacketts, and a 5-4 victory for Justice Scalia's 2006 Rapanos v. United States plurality.
Hopefully the Supreme Court will soon put a permanent stop to the EPA's Clean Water Act land grab.
The Biden administration is the third administration in a row to fail to issue Clean Water Act regulations that pass judicial scrutiny.
A Ninth Circuit opinion concludes that when a federal agency seeks a voluntary remand of a contested rule, that is not enough to vacate the regulation.
If SCOTUS finds in favor of a small-town Idaho couple in Sackett v. EPA, it could end the federal government's jurisdiction over millions of acres of land.
The EPA and Army Corps have finalized a revised definition of "waters of the United States," which defines the scope of federal regulatory jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.
The justices wrestled with the problem of identifying a clear, coherent, and administrable definition to constrain federal regulatory jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.
Ten years after their unanimous Supreme Court victory against the Environmental Protection Agency, the Sacketts return to One First Street for another round.
Supreme Court Grants Certiorari to Clarify the Scope of Federal Regulatory Jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act
The Sacketts get a return trip to the Supreme Court.
Perhaps surprisingly, the Biden Administration is not pushing an expansive interpretation of federal regulatory jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.
The Army Corps and EPA were happy to have the Trump Administration rule remanded, as they are working on a more expansive replacement that will itself face legal challenge.
The Sackett's' litigation with the Environmental Protection Agency has continued, and may provide the Court with a new opportunity to consider the scope of federal regulatory jurisdiction.
The Trump Administration's Clean Water Act rule will remain in place while the Biden Administration works on a replacement.
Supreme Court's Muddled Clean Water Act Ruling Threatens Property Rights and the Trump Administration's Deregulation Efforts
Federal clean water regulations are a confusing mess for property owners. The Supreme Court just made things worse.
Environmental groups were worried the Court would curtail CWA jurisdiction in Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund. It didn't.
Hysterical reactions greet the White House's modest changes to federal clean water rules.
A welcome new federal approach under the Clean Water Act.
The Trump Administration faces another legal setback in its effort to reform federal environmental regulation.
According to federal regulations, they are. But Congress is now subjecting that rule to scrutiny.