Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Supreme Court rules against EPA in dispute over regulating wetlands [View all]Novara
(5,842 posts)33. lots of hyperbole there.
This part:
unjustifiably crushing consequences for violations
is also hyperbole. If the justices have issue with enforcement, then they need to spell that out. And that is a legislative fix, not a judicial one. In other words, it is political and they are taking it upon themselves to legislate from the bench. Once again the SCOTUS took precedent, tossed it out the window, and gave in to political hyperbole.
I maintain that they don't truly understand the CWA and because they don't, they're ceding to industry and developers. They don't understand the definition of a wetland, don't like how it is defined, clearly don't understand the ecosystem and development of wetlands, and instead, are legislating from the bench based on their misunderstanding and ignorance.
That's what I have a problem with. They are not qualified to interpret the scientific intricacies.
If they have an issue with how it's defined, letting the plaintiff win this case isn't the way to solve it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
53 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Supreme Court rules against EPA in dispute over regulating wetlands [View all]
BumRushDaShow
May 2023
OP
Creating a dystopian environmental future, repealing one EPA regulation at a time. nt
OAITW r.2.0
May 2023
#4
All nine concurred that the specific land/wetlands at issue in this case did not meet the
KPN
May 2023
#23
Not exactly. The decision set aside the agency's determination that the wetland involved was
KPN
May 2023
#30
Probably because it was narrow, pretty much focused on this one property owner
BumRushDaShow
May 2023
#38