Subject: Obama-era EPA whacked by SCOTUS
Obama's EPA used to pretend that a puddle in your property was a part of the 'Waters of the United States'. A couple in Idaho dared to build a residential house on <1acre in 2004'only to be fined and beaten up by the EPA over a puddle.

No more of that:

The EPA, however, offers only a passing attempt to square its interpretation with the text of §1362(7), and its 'significant nexus' theory is particularly implausible. It suggests that the meaning of 'the waters of the United States' is so 'broad and unqualified' that, if viewed in isolation, it would extend to all water in the United States. Brief for Respondents 32. The EPA thus turns to the 'significant nexus' test in order to reduce the clash between its understanding of 'the waters of the United States' and the term defined by that phrase, i.e., 'navigable waters.' As discussed, however, the meaning of 'waters' is more limited than the EPA believes. See supra, at 14. And, in any event, the CWA never mentions the 'significant nexus' test, so the EPA has no statutory basis to impose it. See Rapanos, 547 U. S., at 755'756 (plurality opinion).

No more of that! The Chevron doctrine is next.
Sadly, it took 19 years for the Sacketts to get Justice.

https://hotair.com/ed-morrisse...