{"id":39297,"date":"2025-03-04T15:49:00","date_gmt":"2025-03-04T21:49:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/?p=39297"},"modified":"2025-03-04T21:48:13","modified_gmt":"2025-03-05T03:48:13","slug":"us-supreme-court-reins-in-epa-power-to-police-water-pollution-discharge","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/?p=39297","title":{"rendered":"US Supreme Court reins in EPA power to police water pollution discharge"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">WASHINGTON, March 4 (Reuters) &#8211; The&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.reuters.com\/legal\/us-supreme-court\/\"><u>U.S. Supreme Court<\/u><\/a>&nbsp;dealt a blow to the Environmental Protection Agency in a ruling on Tuesday involving a wastewater treatment facility owned by the city of San Francisco that could make it harder for regulators to police water pollution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">The justices, in a 5-4 decision, ruled that the EPA exceeded its authority under a landmark anti-pollution law by including vague restrictions in a permit issued for the wastewater treatment facility, which empties into the Pacific Ocean. The city had sued to challenge the EPA restrictions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">The ruling, authored by conservative Justice Samuel Alito, reversed a decision by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that had upheld the permit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">Alito wrote that the EPA exceeded its powers under the landmark Clean Water Act of 1972 by imposing undefined requirements on permit-holders related to water quality standards in the receiving body of water.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">&#8220;This case involves provisions that do not spell out what a permittee must do or refrain from doing; rather, they make a permittee responsible for the quality of the water in the body of water into which the permittee discharges pollutants,&#8221; Alito wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">&#8220;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,&#8221; Alito added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">Water quality standards are devised by states and subject to federal approval.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote a dissent that was joined by the court&#8217;s three liberal members.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">&#8220;EPA is required to issue the limitations necessary to ensure that the water quality standards are met,&#8221; Barrett wrote. &#8220;So taking a tool away from 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.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has limited the EPA&#8217;s reach in recent years as part of a series of rulings curbing the power federal regulatory agencies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reuters.com\/legal\/us-supreme-court-reins-epa-power-police-water-pollution-discharge-2025-03-04\/\">reuters<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>WASHINGTON, March 4 (Reuters) &#8211; The&nbsp;U.S. Supreme Court&nbsp;dealt a blow to the Environmental Protection Agency in a ruling on Tuesday involving a wastewater treatment facility owned by the city of San Francisco that could make it harder for regulators to police water pollution. The justices, in a 5-4 decision, ruled that the EPA exceeded its [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":39298,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[2523,1401,1929,26602,2784],"class_list":["post-39297","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-politics","tag-epa","tag-power","tag-restrictions","tag-us-supreme-court","tag-water-pollution"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39297","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=39297"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39297\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":39299,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39297\/revisions\/39299"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/39298"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=39297"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=39297"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=39297"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}