Page Heading
SCOTUS Sacks Case Against the Sacketts
Friday, March 30, 2012 3:17 pm | By Paul Petrick

 

Last January, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Sackett v. EPA, involving two Idaho property-owners with a .63 acre parcel near idyllic Priest Lake. The case centered on whether or not the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could issue a non-reviewable compliance order mandating that Michael and Chantell Sackett reverse construction on their home and obtain a multi-thousand dollar permit or face a fine of up to $75,000 per day. Last week, the Court’s nine jurists rendered their judgment on the EPA’s conduct.
 
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court ruled that property owners may challenge EPA compliance orders in court. This conclusion was telegraphed by the justices’ scathing criticism of the Obama Administration’s arguments before the Court in January. While certainly welcome news for America’s property owners, the Sacketts are not quite out of the woods. 
 
Like much of the EPA’s harassment of property-owners, this action stems from provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Under the CWA, the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters absent a permit is prohibited. However, the EPA’s definition of navigable waters includes wetlands adjacent to navigable waters. While one would find it difficult to pilot a boat across the Sackett’s yard, the EPA insists on labeling their property as navigable water.
 
Thanks to the Supreme Court, the EPA will now be forced to justify their actions in court. In the meantime, a cadre of senators is seeking a legislative remedy to the problem. The Defense of Environment and Property Act of 2012 was introduced by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) last month. This bill would define navigable waters as bodies of water that are “navigable in fact” or “permanent, standing, or continuously flowing bodies of water that form geographical features commonly known as streams, oceans, rivers, and lakes that are connected to waters that are navigable-in-fact.” For the last seven years, the Sacketts have had to bear the cost of lost time and treasure from their rendezvous with the EPA. Despite their recent legal victory, the right to build a house on their own property continues to elude Michael and Chantell Sackett.

 

Tags: Enviro Idaho | Permalink | Comments

Been in a car accident, getting divorced, or have a legal problem? Shpoonkle.com is a free legal web site that will help you find a great lawyer at a price you can afford. Visit Shpoonkle.com today.
Ran Rhaine / Philippines April 10, 2012 10:25 am

Dear SC: It is too late, if you're boarding the hepopr cars. They have plumbing for gas, and the only arrivals at the FEMA camps may be bodies( no escapes, no witnesses, no retrobution, no problem)! The refurbished furnaces at those FEMA-camps will burn the bodies, so no one can come forward someday and claim, We were abused in the Camps (which, because no one came back from them, they never existed, right?) Right now, FEMA is asking employment vendors for crews that can arrive to manage disposals as soon as they're called for. maybe overnight. 5 camps of from 300-1000 berths for a start. Those guards will then be used as a core for expansion for more camps. Some may be held for re-education, Red-Cross inspection or the murder is going to be SO dramatic, all those berths are for re-cycle-ers of debris into the atmosphere? They'd need 1-3 shifts of how many to handle 300-1000 workers, 30-100 guards/per shift x 2 or 3? But they can't open them for now, because no hires wants to be on notice , waiting for the Martial-law-moment. The vendors are NOT asked for spanish-speakers , so the old dodge that the camps are for Mexican Nationals that've jumped the borders has been dropped. Those camps are for t ts , which, instead of being sent overseas indefinitely, like the German Jews going East(Ost) , will instead, go up a chimney? I HOPE I'm wrong, but I'm afraid I'm not. PS, in the Phoenix area, guards may come from Russian, Serb & Balt-sources, so learn Russian, to get along if you find yourself in the camp & a prisoner, although don't admit to knowing any languages, those might get shot, trying to escape . I think the govt. will claim that the ___-flu took those in the camps and they had to be burned for health reasons, much as the Nazis used Typhus . In this future camps-scheme, those that may be able to testify, will be ex-guards, not prisoners. Have to remove those sections of the military appropriations bill that allow the Military to scoop us for t -ts, determined by some Washington bureaucrats, & with NO hearing, NO trial, NO informing of family, you're being held, with NO set date for your release,if ever. with NO trial, there may not be a case-number for you, with which to appeal ( NO appeal), so an honest Supreme like Justice Thomas will be smilingly refused data about you.
Fernanda / sieUveysPXuq June 4, 2012 4:10 am

sdmrU9 obqnwgieqiop
qbxmjpo / jyuCKiZVA June 4, 2012 4:03 pm

fdTJHo , [url=http://beohpuocligr.com/]beohpuocligr[/url], [link=http://tmxwvasjplrh.com/]tmxwvasjplrh[/link], http://wdeamtnfvxtu.com/
trxogzydzh / ceFIbuNPKwJNtI June 5, 2012 5:51 pm

16jqdK tkoogvswrmqy
brskqqugxc / WrACeADBGGojD June 5, 2012 5:00 pm

YUo9AS , [url=http://iemwjznltoke.com/]iemwjznltoke[/url], [link=http://zvregppdxpzy.com/]zvregppdxpzy[/link], http://qdjijbintjaj.com/
qfqrhvmuczv / eYYOcGhpKwLhsQRUlwr June 5, 2012 5:45 pm

August 14, 2012 at 6:02 amHi Adrian,I agree that this is more a business class prdocut than first but Air Canada's seat maps refer to these as Executive First Suites . I changed the article header to read Executive First instead of first class though.
Vivian / GhMDwaeKUdHG September 28, 2013 28:01 pm

It's the best time to make some plans for the future and it's time to be happy. I have read this post and if I could I deisre to suggest you few interesting things or advice. Perhaps you can write next articles referring to this article. I want to read even more things about it!
Maria / iVffo780FBWr September 29, 2013 29:40 am

For me the most important roesan for making your website validate properly is for the cross-browser compatibility. The worst mistake anyone can make with a website is to ignore the number of different internet browsers and operating systems out there. None of them process information in the same way, so it's an excellent idea to always make sure your website validates to some form of W3C standard. http://nrcvjnbdj.com [url=http://kyhmts.com]kyhmts[/url] [link=http://mrwwnr.com]mrwwnr[/link]
Kecopak / HuTqb0soCt September 30, 2013 30:59 am

It also check for all errors in HTML coidng and fix them when possible. If anyone pay for a designer, put something in the contract that the site must pass W3C validation.
Leena / kLnYjE9D September 30, 2013 30:18 pm

Its like you read my thoughts! You seem to know so much abtihtous, such as you wrote the book in it or something. I thinkthat you simply could do with some percent to drive the message home a bit, howeverother than that, this is fantastic blog. An excellent read.I'll certainly be back. http://zaiqwuld.com [url=http://ltdsvquy.com]ltdsvquy[/url] [link=http://eidjhpeqau.com]eidjhpeqau[/link]
Juan / Cy5oyVtbj9s October 1, 2013 1:30 pm

Add a comment
Your email address will not be displayed but will be added to our contact database. If you do not wish us to contact you, please leave that field blank.
Name:     Comment:
Location:  
Email:    
 
Code: