The Supreme Court ruled in favor of San Francisco against the E.P.A. regulations aimed at limiting offshore pollution. The 5-4 decision challenges the agency's authority under the Clean Water Act regarding wastewater disposal in the Pacific Ocean. The case featured an unusual alliance between liberal San Francisco and several industry groups. Justice Alito noted that while specific pollution prevention requirements can be enforced, broader standards cannot be used to penalize entities complying with their permits. This ruling has profound implications for how the E.P.A. can impose regulations and who will be held accountable for pollution.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. stated that while the E.P.A. can impose specific pollution prevention requirements, it cannot penalize violations of broader water quality standards without specific proof.
The court’s ruling has significant implications for the E.P.A., preventing it from holding entities liable for wastewater discharges when they comply with their specific permits.
Collection
[
|
...
]