|
The Sackett v. EPA case goes back to 2004. Michael and Chantelle
Sackett were building a home in Idaho when they were told they
could not backfill a lot with dirt because the property was on
wetlands adjacent to a tributary.
“It's a huge win for our farmers here in Illinois and throughout
the country because with [the ruling] the Supreme Court came
down on with the Sackett case, it really eliminates 20 years of
what we’ve termed judicial confusion,” said Mark Gebhards with
the Illinois Farm Bureau.
A majority of five judges agreed that the Clean Water Act only
applies to wetlands that have a continuous surface connection to
bigger bodies of water, where it is difficult to tell where the
waters end and the wetlands begin.
It is a stricter interpretation than the one the Biden
administration has been using, commonly called “WOTUS”, which
specifies that the wetlands have to have a “significant nexus”
with a body of water.
"Does the term encompass any backyard that is soggy enough for
some minimum period of time? Does it reach 'mudflats, sandflats,
wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, [or] playa
lakes?' How about ditches, swimming pools, and puddles?" Justice
Samuel Alito wrote in the opinion.
“This ruling is the law of the land and directs the Biden
administration to revisit WOTUS and issue a clear rule that
doesn’t require farmers to hire a team of attorneys to care for
their land,” said Illinois Farm Bureau President Richard Guebert
Jr. in a statement.
Kevin Bessler reports on statewide issues in
Illinois for the Center Square. He has over 30 years of
experience in radio news reporting throughout the Midwest.
|
|
