Related Searches: Tea Vitamin Nutrients Ingredients paper cup packing

Food & Health Ingredients
Health & Nutrition
Processing & Packaging
Starch & Starch Derivatives
You are here: Home >news >All wait on the ‘Navigable Waters’ of the United States case by the Supreme Court

All wait on the ‘Navigable Waters’ of the United States case by the Supreme Court

2023-04-14 Food Safety News

Tag: navigable waters

Share       

This week is going to be remembered for another definition of the Waters of the United States, commonly known as WOTUS, being struck down by a federal court.

In this case, the U.S. District Court for North Dakota has invalidated the Environmntal Protection Agency’s most recent rule for defining what constitutes navigable waters under the half-century-old Clean Water Act. The impact of the federal judge’s decision is to remove the WOTUS rule from 24 states.

In 51 years Congress has never provided the definitions needed to administer this part of the Clean Water Act. That has left the EPA, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the states including farm and development groups to fight over the details.

In its current term, the U.S. Supreme Court has heard a case known as Sackett v. EPA, which might clarify the terminology if it actually defines “navigable waters” under WOTUS. That high court ruling is expected to be published by late June.

Because the North Dakota federal District Court ruling was a preliminary injunction favoring 24 state attorney generals who brought a lawsuit, EPA has switched to using the pre-2015 regulations in the other 26 states until further notice.

The 24 states see the new EPA rule as a massive expansion of federal jurisdiction by its definitions for such terms as “adjacent wetland” and “additional waters” for certain local lakes and streams. The EPA wants to qualify waters on a case-by-case basis with terms like “relatively permanent” and “significant nexus” being qualifiers.

The states generally want bright-line definitions to prevail that protect their role in the federal system.

And the preliminary injunction came just a few days after President Biden’s veto kept the EPA’s March 20, 2023, rule intact.

That’s the date of the rule that returns the Agency’s interpretation of WOTUS to that of the Obama administration, an interpretation that was revoked and replaced by the Trump administration.

In March, Congress approved Joint Resolution 27. The joint resolution would have given EPA’s revised definition of WOTUS “no force or effect.” By a vote of 227-198, nine Democrats joined all House Republicans (except one) in support of the joint resolution. 

Then, The U.S. Senate approved the same Joint Resolution by a vote of 53-43, with five Democrats joining all Senate Republicans (except one). The Biden veto then followed.

EPA’s revised definition of WOTUS then had a few days until the North Dakota court ruled, sending EPA back to its 2015 rulebook.

E-newsletter

Subscribe to our e-newsletter for the latest food ingredients news and trends.

Tags

SJGLE B2B Website : 中文版 | ChineseCustomer Service: 86-400 610 1188-3 ( Mon-Fri 9: 00-18: 00 BJT)

About Us|Contact Us|Privacy Policy|Intellectual Property Statement

Copyright 2006-2023 Shanghai Sinoexpo Informa Markets International Exhibition Co Ltd (All Rights Reserved). ICP 05034851-121  沪公网安备31010402001403号

Inquiry Basket

Inquiry Basket

Buyer service

Buyer service

Supplier service

Supplier service

Top

Top