Bell Curve The Law Talking Guy Raised by Republicans U.S. West
Well, he's kind of had it in for me ever since I accidentally ran over his dog. Actually, replace "accidentally" with "repeatedly," and replace "dog" with "son."

Monday, June 19, 2006

Umpire, My Ass

In a 5-4 decision today, the Supreme Court overruled some of the existing wetlands protections in the Clean Water Act, but not did not give the anti-environmental ("property rights") activists the full victory they wanted. The court chose not to draw clear, sweeping limits to the power of the Army Corps of Engineers (those liberal hotheads?) to regulate use of privately owned wetlands.

This would appear to be in keeping with the Roberts court's policy of making as narrow rulings as they can. However, according to the NY Times, the only reason the conservative majority did not make the sweeping changes was Justice Kennedy wouldn't go along with Justice Scalia's broad brushtrokes. (Kennedy wrote a concurring opinion.) According to the NY Times, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. expressed disappointment the court had not reached agreement on the limits that Congress had placed on the reach of the Clean Water Act, he predicted much litigation ahead: "Lower courts and regulated entities will now have to feel their way on a case-by-case basis," he lamented.

Apparently, Chief Justice Roberts only likes to rule narrowly for liberal causes.


Anonymous said...

Can we give him a red card? 

// posted by LTG

Anonymous said...

Only if he rules against Italy. 

// posted by Raised By Republicans