U.S. Supreme Court agrees to consider limiting wetlands regulation

  • 📰 ReutersScience
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 29 sec. here
  • 2 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 15%
  • Publisher: 51%

Law Law Headlines News

Law Law Latest News,Law Law Headlines

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to consider limiting the scope of a landmark federal environmental law as it took up for the second time an Idaho couple's bid to build on property the federal government has deemed a protected wetland.

The justices will hear an appeal by Chantell Sackett and her husband Mike Sackett, who own property in Priest Lake, Idaho where they hoped to build a home, of a lower court ruling favoring the government.

There has been lengthy litigation and political debates over how much of a connection with a waterway a property must have in order to require a permit, with the Supreme Court issuing a ruling in 2006 that led to further uncertainty. The last three presidential administrations have sought to clarify the issue through regulations. Democrat Barack Obama embraced broader federal reach, while his Republican successor Donald Trump took the opposite approach. Democratic President Joe President Biden's administration is currently working on a new regulation.

 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.
We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 559. in LAW

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Opinion | How the Supreme Court mask controversy is missing the pointSteven Lubet: The focus on whether Justice Gorsuch was or wasn’t asked to wear a face covering misses the point: He shouldn’t have had to be asked in the first place. - NBCNewsTHINK THINK ThePerezHilton THINK Who says he didn't have a mask on when around others. Typical NBC fake news. THINK Masks And The Vax Do Not Stop You From Getting Covid
Source: NBCNews - 🏆 10. / 86 Read more »

University Hospitals reinstates vaccine requirement for caregivers after Supreme Court ruling'Since the vaccine became available in late 2020, we have encouraged our caregivers to get vaccinated and made vaccines readily available to them.' ALL CAREGIVERS should be vaccinated worldwide. They don’t work
Source: cleveland19news - 🏆 70. / 68 Read more »

Supreme Court adds affirmative action to its potential hit listThe Supreme Court agreed Friday to revisit the question of affirmative action in higher education, deciding to hear a case challenging Harvard and the University of North Carolina's use of race in college admissions.
Source: WBUR - 🏆 274. / 63 Read more »

Is Ginni Thomas a Threat to the Supreme Court?“Ginni Thomas is behaving horribly, and she’s hurt the Supreme Court and the administration of justice,” the judicial ethicist Stephen Gillers said. “If you could take a secret poll of the other eight Justices, I have no doubt that they are appalled.” No actually Clarance is the threat. i actually do doubt this lmao. maybe like a couple other justices tops I appreciate that this illustration makes her look every bit as ghastly as she actually is
Source: NewYorker - 🏆 90. / 67 Read more »

Supreme Court won’t speed challenge to Texas abortion limitsOver dissents from the three liberal justices, the court declined to order a federal appeals court to return the case to a federal judge who had temporarily blocked the law’s enforcement. The court offered no explanation for its action.
Source: AKNewsNow - 🏆 460. / 53 Read more »

Supreme Court takes cases on future of affirmative actionJUST IN: The U.S. Supreme Court says it will take up a pair of cases that could decide the future of affirmative action in college admissions. Today SCOTUS put private affirmative action on the block, just as it did protection of voting rights for blacks in the South. Shamelessly. The Supreme Court isn’t wasting time overturning established law. Ugh! And you ask yourself what good is Clarence Thompson to colored pple really - it would seem he agrees with every bad thing meted out to blacks.
Source: ABC - 🏆 471. / 51 Read more »