Clean Water Act

The Fight Over Tribal Authority Under the Clean Water Act

The Fight Over Tribal Authority Under the Clean Water Act

2L staffer, Zachary Mills, discusses the importance of the Clean Water Act and how the act continues to change through public and presidential pressure. Mills focuses explicitly on Section 401 of the Act, where it designates state and tribal governments as “certifying authorities” for these licenses, but after Trump’s Executive Order 13956, the EPA narrowed Section 401. Mills highly encourages courts to truly realize the change to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act does more harm than good for the Native American communities.

Supreme Court to Take on the Muddy and Polluted Interpretations of the Clean Water Act

Supreme Court to Take on the Muddy and Polluted Interpretations of the Clean Water Act

Preview Lauren Keeler’s note on the Clean Water Act in this blog post. Updated to reflect the arguments heard before the Supreme Court on November 6, 2019, this blog provides an overview of the litigation surrounding the Clean Water Act as well as insights into the arguments heard thus far.

Coal Ash in Herrington Lake and the Clean Water Act

Coal Ash in Herrington Lake and the Clean Water Act

A Sixth Circuit case alleged that Kentucky Utilities violated the Clean Water Act and the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act. In 2018 the suit was dismissed due to Kentucky Utilities having agreed to submit a remedial action plan. This plan is currently pending, but there are some issues as some believe the Clean Water Act does not relate to groundwater. Kyle Ruschell is hoping this case could clarify the Clean Water Act.

Repealing Rapanos: Shrinking the Clean Water Act’s Jurisdiction

Repealing Rapanos: Shrinking the Clean Water Act’s Jurisdiction

It is not often that a criminal appeal can change the face of American environmental law and change the jurisdiction of major environmental legislation. This is why anyone concerned with ecological diversity or clean water ought to be watching closely for the Supreme Court’s upcoming decision in United States v. Hughes. In particular, it may greatly decrease the regulatory scope of the Clean Water Act, which controls the discharge of pollutants into the “navigable waters” of the United States.