Federal court rules against EPA

On Friday, a federal court ruled against the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) attempt at expanding the federal government’s control over waterways. The Obama Administration cites the Clean Water Act of 1972 as their legal grounds for this sweeping policy.

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, located in Cincinnati, ruled in line with a decision that came out of North Dakota in August. Both court decisions say they are unclear whether or not they have the jurisdiction to review the legislation.

For now, a stay is in place, meaning the EPA must halt activity related to this issue while the court deliberates.

“A stay allows for a more deliberate determination whether this exercise of executive power, enabled by Congress and explicated by the Supreme Court, is proper under the dictates of federal law,” the court said. “A stay temporarily silences the whirlwind of confusion that springs from uncertainty about the requirements of the new Rule and whether they will survive legal testing. A stay honors the policy of cooperative federalism that informs the Clean Water Act and must attend the shared responsibility for safeguarding the nation’s waters.”

While the EPA vows to respect the courts decisions, the agency feels they have merit under the Clean Water Rule.

“The Clean Water Rule was developed by the agencies to respond to an urgent need to improve and simplify the process for identifying waters that are and are not protected under the Clean Water Act, and is based on the latest science and the law,” EPA spokeswoman Melissa Harrison told The Hill.

Groups who oppose the proposed policy say the EPA is overstepping its bounds and intruding on states’ rights. Environmentalists, however, are upset by the court’s decision.