This week the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Nat’l Ass’n of Mfrs. v. Dep’t of Def., No. 16-299 that district courts have jurisdiction to hear challenges to any rule that attempts to define "Waters of the United States" for purposes of determining the scope of coverage of the Clean Water Act. As detailed on this
Clean Water Rule
Unwind of WOTUS Gets Us Back to the Beginning
The Trump Administration has promised massive deregulation, in particular reductions in environmental regulations. A major target of the Trump Administration’s deregulation agenda is the Obama Administration’s Waters of the U.S. Rule (WOTUS) which defines which wetlands and streams are federally regulated.
However, as described in this post, despite the controversy, all of the regulatory activity…
Surge in Environmental Citizen Suits Anticipated under Trump Administration
The Trump Administration has made rollback of environmental regulations a top priority. Through the use of Executive Orders and the Congressional Review Act(CRA), the Administration has already undone significant Obama era regulations, including the Waters of the U.S. Rule (WOTUS) and the Clean Power Plan.
The Trump Administration has also proposed significant budget cuts to…
Supreme Court Decides Army Corps JD’s Can be Appealed
In a very significant case for property owners and developers, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision today that Army Corps Jurisdictional Determinations (JDs) are final agency actions which can be challenged in Court. In U.S. Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes, the Court determined that JDs meet the test for final agency actions:…
U.S. Supreme Court to Decide Whether Army Corps JDs Can be Challenged in Court
In prior posts, I have discussed the split in the federal circuit courts over whether Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Jurisdictional Determinations (JDs) can be challenged in Court. A JD is the ACOE formal determination as to whether streams and wetlands are federally protected under the Clean Water Act and whether a 404/401 permit is…