“While I am disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision in the Sackett case, EPA and Army have an obligation to apply this decision alongside our state co-regulators,” Regan said in a statement Tuesday.regulating “waters of the United States.” Developers and agriculture groups have long sought to limit the federal government’s power to use the Clean Water Act to regulate waterways, arguing the law should cover fewer types of rivers, streams and wetlands.
The Supreme Court ruling was a win for developer and agriculture groups. It said federally protected wetlands must be directly adjacent to a “relatively permanent” waterway “connected to traditional interstate navigable waters,” such was a river or ocean.The court’s decision broke with a 2006 opinion by former Justice Anthony Kennedy that said wetlands were regulated if they had a “significant nexus” to larger bodies of water.
The rule issued Tuesday removes the “significant nexus” test from consideration when identifying tributaries and other waters as federally protected. Because the sole purpose of the new rule is to amend specific provisions of the previous rule that were rendered invalid by the high court, the new rule will take effect immediately, the EPA said.
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.
Source: sdut - 🏆 5. / 95 Read more »
Source: nypost - 🏆 91. / 67 Read more »
Source: sdut - 🏆 5. / 95 Read more »
Source: AP - 🏆 728. / 51 Read more »
Source: KIRO7Seattle - 🏆 271. / 63 Read more »
Source: WOKVNews - 🏆 247. / 63 Read more »