The Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision limiting the federal government’s authority to regulate bodies of water, a decision that is devastating to President Joe Biden and the Democrats.
The unanimous 9-0 decision of the Supreme Court rejected the Environmental Protection Agency’s expansive definition of Waters of the United States, dealing a blow to Biden’s radical climate agenda.
CBS News reported that the Supreme Court’s ruling reverses a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, which had sided with the EPA.
“The reach of the Clean Water Act is notoriously unclear,” Alito wrote. “Any piece of land that is wet at least part of the year is in danger of being classified by E.P.A. employees as wetlands covered by the act, and according to the federal government, if property owners begin to construct a home on a lot that the agency thinks possesses the requisite wetness, the property owners are at the agency’s mercy.”
Democrats have come out in full force against the ruling, condemning “MAGA” efforts to pollute waterways and wetlands.
“This MAGA Supreme Court is continuing to erode our country’s environmental laws,” proclaimed Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. “This ruling will mean more polluted water and more destruction of wetlands.” Rep. Ro Khanna (D., Calif.), meanwhile, said that “the Supreme Court is hurting public health,” asking, “How many Americans would be against clean water?”
The liberal Washington Post omitted the fact that the decision was unanimous and described it as “close,” despite the fact that all nine justices concurred. The news source referred to the decision as “another setback” in the battle against “air and water pollution.”
Ro Khanna, a Democrat from California, stated that the Supreme Court is detrimental to public health and asked, “How many Americans are against clean water?”
Rep. Steny H. Hoyer, a Democrat from Maryland, criticized the ruling, stating that the justices were acting as legislators rather than legal interpreters.
“The Court appoints itself — instead of Congress or the expert agency — the decision-maker on climate policy,” Hoyer said. “That is not how our system of checks and balances works,” he said, adding the Senate should “act on legislation to address the existential threat posed by the climate crisis, including House-passed measures to lower Americans’ energy costs and secure a clean energy future.”
In a separate case, an important announcement was made last week that could affect future elections.
The Supreme Court is contemplating a North Carolina election case that will have a significant impact on the 2024 election regardless of the court’s decision.
The case centers on a constitutional theory known as “independent state legislature theory.” State legislatures, not state courts or governors, have considerable control over the administration of federal elections within their respective states, according to proponents.
The Supreme Court is presently considering Moore v. Harper, a case that specifically addresses the theory. Concerns exist, however, that the court may not reach a comprehensive decision on the matter prior to the 2024 elections.
According to the Washington Examiner:
Moore v. Harper is a dispute over the North Carolina Supreme Court’s rejection of a Republican-backed redistricting plan for being too partisan.
More on this story via Conservative Brief:
Republicans filed a challenge to the high court, but then conservatives managed to regain control of the state Supreme Court. The now-5-2 Republican-majority court subsequently opted to rehear the redistricting case. The court scraped its prior ruling late last month, which was the underpinning of the Moore v. Harper case pending before the Supreme Court. CONTINUE READING…