Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Supreme Court rules against EPA in dispute over regulating wetlands [View all]Novara
(5,754 posts)But one based on ignorance of the science, and that's what pisses me off so much about this kind of shit.
There's no appeal. There's no way to bring in experts to testify now who can talk about why the statute is written the way it was. I don't know if they testified previously or not, but it doesn't sound like it, given their focusing on a "significant nexus" to navigable waters. It doesn't mean contiguous. It sounds like they think so, by their reasoning.
Just because they don't understand the statute doesn't mean it has to be re-written, and parts of it thrown out until it does (if it does).
It sounds like the government did not present their case well enough to get them to understand the statute, which is a whole 'nother kettle of fish.