Supreme Court Reinstates Trump-Era Rule Despite Objection from Biden Administration

The Supreme Court on Wednesday reinstated a Trump-era rule on enforcing the Clean Water Act. The rule limits the authority of states to block federal permits, including for fossil fuel projects. The court ruled 5-4…

IJR SyndicatedApr 7, 20223 min read

Sponsored

According to the Washington Examiner, Washington state denied a coal shipping port in 2018 and New York rejected a natural gas pipeline in 2020.

The Trump administrationrule narrowed state certification criteria, imposed a one-year deadline to block projects and generally prevented states from culling projects for reasons unrelated to water quality, according to The Hill.

But the rule drew the ire of environmental groups and 20 states, which challenged it in court, saying it went against federal law.

After President Joe Biden took over, his administration pledged to revise the rule by 2023, the Examiner reported.

Do you think the Supreme Court did the right thing? YesNo
Completing this poll entitles you to our news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Yes: 88% (7 Votes) No: 12% (1 Votes)

📺 Embedded media — coming soon

In a May 2021 news release, the Environmental Protection Agency said it would work on the revision after coming to the conclusion that the Trump rule “erodes state and Tribal authority.”

“We have serious water challenges to address as a nation and as EPA Administrator, I will not hesitate to correct decisions that weakened the authority of states and Tribes to protect their waters,” Michael S. Regan said in the release.

“We need all state, Tribal, local, and federal partners working in collaboration to protect clean water, which underpins sustainable economic development and vibrant communities. Today, we take an important step to realize this commitment and reaffirm the authority of states and Tribes.”

The Biden administration requested that judges presiding over challenges to the rule — in California, Pennsylvania and South Carolina — remand the disputes to the EPA, according to the Times.

While the judges in South Carolina and Pennsylvania agreed to the request, Judge William H. Alsup of the Federal District Court in San Francisco went further than the EPA requested and vacated the regulation.

Alsup claimed that the rule’s “scope of certification” had a “lack of reasoned decision-making and apparent errors” and that there were “indications that the rule contravenes the structure and purpose of the Clean Water Act.”

In their appeal to the Supreme Court, according to the Times, the Republican-led states argued that he “had acted without considering administrative procedures or finding that the regulation was unlawful.”

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.