Dark Mode Light Mode

Supreme Court Sides With San Francisco in Challenge to EPA

Supreme Court Sides With San Francisco in Challenge to EPA Supreme Court Sides With San Francisco in Challenge to EPA

DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—The Supreme Court sided with San Francisco on Tuesday in its challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency.

A majority on the court held that the EPA exceeded its authority by issuing San Francisco a permit that did not clearly explain the limits on how much sewage it could discharge into the ocean but included a vague “end-result” provision that made the city responsible for the water quality.

Justice Samuel Alito authored the opinion of the court in a 5-4 ruling. Justice Amy Coney Barrett dissented along with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

“When a permit contains such requirements, a permittee that punctiliously follows every specific requirement in its permit may nevertheless face crushing penalties if the quality of the water in its receiving waters falls below the applicable standards,” Alito wrote.

The high court held that such “end-result” requirements are not allowed under federal law. Alito’s opinion also stated “what steps a permittee must take to ensure that water quality standards are met is the EPA’s responsibility, and Congress has given it the tools needed to make that determination.”

Barrett authored the court’s dissenting opinion, arguing that taking this tool from the EPA “may make it harder for the Agency to issue the permits that municipalities and businesses need in order for their discharges to be lawful.”

“If the Agency must impose individualized conditions for each permittee under §1311(b)(1)(C), then it will be more difficult and more time consuming for the Agency to issue permits,” she wrote in an opinion joined by Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson.

San Francisco asked the Supreme Court to step in last year, arguing that the EPA’s vague restrictions expose the city “and numerous permit holders nationwide to enforcement actions,” including penalties reaching billions of dollars.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled against San Francisco in July 2023.

Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation



This article was originally published at www.dailysignal.com

Keep Up to Date with the Most Important News

Previous Post
What to look out for at the National People's Congress

What to look out for at the National People's Congress

Next Post
Media Reaction to Biden SOTU Just a Little Off

Media Reaction to Biden SOTU Just a Little Off

The American Salient
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.