US top court backs landowners in EPA clean water case

[Valin]

Reuters: James Vicini

2/21/12

 

WASHINGTON, March 21 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that landowners may bring a civil lawsuit challenging a federal government order under the clean water law, a decision that sides with corporate groups and sharply curtails a key Environmental Protection Agency power.

 

The justices unanimously rejected the U.S. government's position that individuals or companies must first fail to comply with an EPA order and face potentially costly enforcement action before a court can review the case.

 

The opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia was a victory for an Idaho couple who challenged a 2007 EPA order that required them to restore a wetland they had filled with dirt and rock as they began to build a new vacation home near Priest Lake. They were also told to stop construction on the home.

 

(Snip)

 

Freedom 1 EPA 0

 

H/T PJ Tatler

 

 

Pacific Legal Foundation Press Release

 

[WestVirginiaRebel]

CNBC:

The Supreme Court has sided with an Idaho couple in a property rights case, ruling they can go to court to challenge an Environmental Protection Agency order that blocked construction of their new home and threatened fines of more than $30,000 a day.

Wednesday's decision is a victory for Mike and Chantell Sackett, whose property near a scenic lake has sat undisturbed since the EPA ordered a halt in work in 2007. The agency said part of the property was a wetlands that could not disturbed without a permit.

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.

The EPA issues nearly 3,000 administrative compliance orders a year that call on alleged violators of environmental laws to stop what they're doing and repair the harm they've caused. Major business groups, homebuilders, road builders and agricultural interests all have joined the Sacketts in urging the court to make it easier to contest EPA compliance orders issued under several environmental laws.

________

 

Property owners 1, EPA 0.

[clearvision]

This is good news. It means you can now take EPA to court before they get to fine you. Now if they could just make it so you can take the IRS to court, before they fine you.

[Valin]

This is good news. It means you can now take EPA to court before they get to fine you. Now if they could just make it so you can take the IRS to court, before they fine you.

 

Innocent until proven guilty! What a novel concept.