SCOTUS Hears Case on Protecting State Sovereignty Over Water and Land
–West Virginia has Led 26-State Coalition in Support of Issue–
CHARLESTON — West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey said the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Monday in a case that could determine how far the federal government’s regulatory reach extends over rivers, lakes, streams, pools of water, wetlands and more.
The case in particular, Sackett v Environmental Protection Agency, is a decades-long battle over the reach of the federal Clean Water Act. The Attorney General has led a 26-state coalition in an amicus brief in support of the petitioners, Michael and Chantell Sackett.
“The Supreme Court needs to define once and for all the term ‘waters of the United States’ in such a way that state lands and waters are not subject to the whims of unelected bureaucrats,” Attorney General Morrisey said. “Not only does the confusion challenge the states’ sovereignty, but it is extremely costly to property owners who can spend years and tens, or even hundreds of thousands of dollars just getting permission from the federal regulators to build on their own property.”
The Sacketts have been trying to build a home on a lot near Priest Lake, Idaho, since 2007, but the EPA forced them to cease the project because the agency said filling in the lot would affect water flowing into the lake.
The coalition contends the current definition by a lower court sets “waters of the United States” so broadly that it could be used for a federal water and land grab.
“This issue affects not only developers but just about anyone who finds themselves trying to build anywhere near a stream, river, or lake anywhere in the United States,” Attorney General Morrisey said.
The Attorney General said states have historically had extensive authority over water and the land that adjoins it within their respective state borders. However, this sovereign authority is now under attack from the EPA and previous court rulings that have too broadly defined which bodies of water and adjacent lands are subject to federal regulation.
The West Virginia-led brief was joined by the attorneys general of Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Wyoming.