Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Supreme Court sides with North Idaho couple against EPA...

the Sacketts can challenge EPA ruling.

However, their chances of winning are not good because the EPA operates as a rogue agency that makes a mockery of private property rights and it should be eliminated post haste.  The federal government has no business coming into sovereign states and meddling. 

From our local TV station: 
In an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia, the court rejected EPA's argument that allowing property owners quick access to courts to contest orders like the one issued to the Sacketts would compromise the agency's ability to deal with water pollution.
"Compliance orders will remain an effective means of securing prompt voluntary compliance in those many cases where there is no substantial basis to question their validity," Scalia said.
In this case, the couple objected to the determination that their small lot contained wetlands that are regulated by the Clean Water Act, and they complained there was no reasonable way to challenge the order without risking fines that can mount quickly. source
Their fines are now over 100 MILLION dollars

Justice Alito:
 "The position taken in this case by the Federal Government—a position that the Court now squarely rejects—would have put the property rights of ordinary Americans entirely at the mercy of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) employees. The reach of the Clean Water Act is notoriously unclear. Any piece of land that is wet at least part of the year is in danger of being classified by EPA employees as wetlands covered by the Act, and according to the Federal Government, if property owners begin to construct a home on a lot that the agency thinks possesses the requisite wetness, the property owners are at the agency’s mercy." (Alito, J., concurring)

Unanimous SCOTUS: Property Owners Entitled To Judicial Review Of EPA "Compliance Order"
Supreme Court allows Idaho couple to challenge EPA on wetlands ruling

No comments: