The Supreme Court has made it harder for the federal government to police water pollution. The decision from the court on Thursday strips protections from wetlands that are isolated from larger bodies of water. It’s the second ruling in as many years in which a conservative majority has narrowed the reach of environmental regulations. The justices boosted property rights over concerns about clean water in ruling in favor of an Idaho couple who sought to build a house near a lake. The couple objected when federal officials identified a soggy portion of the property as a wetlands that required a building permit.
The Supreme Court on Thursday made it harder for the federal government to police water pollution in a decision that strips protections from wetlands that are isolated from larger bodies of water.
It’s the second decision in as many years in which a conservative majority of the court narrowed the reach of environmental regulations.
The justices boosted property rights over concerns about clean water in a ruling in favor of an Idaho couple who sought to build a house near Priest Lake in the state’s panhandle. Chantell and Michael Sackett objected when federal officials identified a soggy portion of the property as a wetlands that required them to get a permit before building.
The court jettisoned the 17-year-old opinion by their former colleague, Anthony Kennedy, allowing regulation of wetlands that have a “significant nexus” to the larger waterways.
Kennedy’s opinion had been the standard for evaluating whether wetlands were covered under the 1972 landmark environmental law.
