Today the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Sackett v. EPA, one of the most important property rights cases to reach the Court in recent history. The case involves a complicated statutory scheme created by the Clean Water Act (CWA), which (as relevant here) is enforced by the EPA. In brief, the CWA seeks to protect the “navigable waters of the United States” against pollution. What makes this case interesting and entertaining (at least for observers) is that the EPA has interpreted the term “navigable waters” to include in …
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is developing the reputation for moving forward with plans Congress cannot accomplish. Last Congress, Representative Jim Oberstar (D-MN) and Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) tried to expand the powers of the EPA by introducing legislation that would replace the term “navigable waters” in the Clean Water Act with “waters of the U.S.,” which would significantly expand what the EPA could regulate. Reforming the Clean Water Act is necessary, but this is the wrong way to go about it. Congress rejected the Oberstar-Feingold approach, but now EPA …
In sharp contrast to the pro-nuclear energy rhetoric of the Administration, some nuclear power plant owners are considering shutting down their facilities. Exelon, owner of the New Jersey Oyster Creek nuclear power plant, recently announced that it plans to close the plant 10 years early because of EPA regulations aimed at reducing the environmental impact of plants’ cooling water intake systems. Currently, Oyster Creek employs the accepted “best technology available”—based on a site-specific cost-benefit analysis—and uses water from nearby Barnegat Bay to cool the reactor. This is no longer good …
The New York Times reports today that only 8.4% of the $3.2 billion Congress included in President Barack Obama’s failed stimulus to create green jobs by improving energy efficiency has been spent through July. From the NYT: The program was to provide money for the purchase of better lighting or heating and cooling equipment for buildings like city halls and schools. But it is off to the same slow start as a bigger program that was initiated at the same time to weatherize the homes of low-income people around the …
In her questioning of Elena Kagan yesterday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) asked about the degree to which courts should defer to agency constructions of statutes, pointing to a 2006 Supreme Court decision regarding the Clean Water Act (CWA) that left intermittent seasonal streams unprotected. Kagan told Senator Feinstein she did not know of the specific decision and, instead, explained the general principles of judicial deference to agency constructions of statutes passed by Congress. In doing so, she correctly referred to the Court’s decision in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources …
For Earth Day’s 40th anniversary, President Obama and the White House released a video praising Americans for our environmental awareness, and urging us to get personally involved with improving our local environments. The president’s message of individual responsibility is commendable but his message that we’ll spend and regulate our way to a clean energy economy is troubling. “It’s clear change won’t come from Washington alone,” the president said in his message. The reality is that most productive change comes from outside Washington. The government is good at obstructing that progress …
The Waxman-Markey global warming bill is far and away the most worrisome environmental measure currently working its way through Congress, but it is certainly not the only cause for concern. Despite the all-encompassing global warming debate (and perhaps because of it) other problematic green measures are also being rushed through the House or Senate with minimal discussion. One such measure is S. 787, the Clean Water Restoration Act (CWRA). Like Waxman-Markey, the CWRA would do much more harm than good, especially for farmers, ranchers, developers, energy producers, and other property …
Reps. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.) and Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) have called out the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for not properly enforcing the Clean Water Act, and have demanded “the agency provide Congress with information about its enforcement process.” This is in response to an internal letter from the EPA that claimed it was more difficult to enforce The Clean Water Act since the 2006 ruling in Rapanos v. United States. The decision was a favorable one for those that object to excessive and burdensome federal regulations. The Pacific Legal Foundation, who …
