SCOTUS on WOTUS
I’m Bob Larson. The Supreme Court will soon try to finally clarify what the Clean Water Act means by “Waters of the U.S.”
Tony Francois with the Pacific Legal Foundation wants to replace a 2006 split Court ruling with a clear majority and a narrower WOTUS definition …
FRANCOIS … “Regulators have used the expansiveness and kind of ambiguity and vagueness of the ‘significant nexus’ test to push the outer limits of their authority.”
The earlier High Court split muddied the waters for folks like California farmer Jack LaPant …
LaPANT … “At one meeting in Sacramento, the lead with the Army Corps explained to me, and these are his words, ‘Mr. LaPant, we do not own your property, but we own all the water coming from the heavens.’”
Heritage Senior Research Fellow Paul Larkin Jr. argues Congress needs to fix the statute …
LARKIN … “All it says is ‘Waters of the United States,’ which doesn’t tell you which particular waters matter. After all, a term has to be sufficiently clear, not only so that it can be understood, but it has to be sufficiently clear so that it can be applied in real life, by average people.”
Larkin predicts today’s more conservative Supreme court will rule against expansive agency power and end the WOTUS confusion and unfairness.
