Yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled to limit the EPA’s power to regulate wetlands—a move considered a win for property-rights advocates and a blow to environmentalists.
The property owners most immediately impacted are the Idaho couple who brought this case to court: They sued the EPA over a permit issue that prevented them from building a house on their property near Priest Lake. As a result of the Supreme Court’s ruling, the pair can get to work on their teal “Lake Days Are the Best Days” sign.
But the consequences, of course, extend beyond rural Idaho. As a result of the SCOTUS ruling, the EPA’s power over the nation’s wetlands will shrink like a pair of linen pants in the dryer: Roughly half of all wetlands and about 60% of streams in the US will lose federal protection.
It presents risks for the environment but opportunities for some industries—homebuilding and oil and gas, in particular—which no longer have to worry as much about complying with the Clean Water Act and its many permitting requirements (Section 401, iykyk).
Now, homebuilders will be able to fill wetlands and construct housing developments on or near them without the Army Corps of Engineers signing off.
Companies will be able to discharge pollutants into unprotected wetlands with no regulatory oversight.
This isn’t the first instance of the Supreme Court weakening environmental regulations recently. In June of last year, SCOTUS also limited the EPA’s power to regulate carbon emissions.—CC
