Northwestern Pritzker School of Law’s Robert Weinstock and Alexa Longstaff say there are shortcomings to the Supreme Court ...
In a narrow 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled to limit the EPA's authority to issue broad water pollution permits under ...
The dissent, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, suggests that the legal theory of five-vote majority decision was largely of the Court’s own making and contends that its narrow interpretation of ...
The New Republic on MSN5dOpinion
The Supreme Court Muddied the Clean Water Act Yet AgainAmy Coney Barrett joined the liberal justices in a dissent against Samuel Alito—and his thinly veiled policy agenda.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court substantially weakened federal limitations on raw sewage discharge into nearby bodies of water.
Latin Times on MSN5d
Supreme Court Leaves Users Disgusted After Rolling Back Clean Water Act's Raw Sewage Discharge Limitations: 'Poop Is Back On the Menu'The Supreme Court weakened restrictions on the discharge of raw sewage into water supplies in a 5-4 decision to roll back ...
On Tuesday, March 4, 2025, the Supreme Court issued an opinion in City and County of San Francisco, California v.
Americans are getting antsy about the possibility of poop in the drinking water thanks to a new interpretation of the Clean ...
An environmental lawyer who wrote an amicus brief in San Francisco v. EPA believes a criticized ruling actually means tougher ...
The 5-to-4 decision is the latest setback for the agency and could have sweeping implications for curtailing water pollution ...
The justices ruled that the agency cannot impose generic prohibitions against violating water quality standards.
Supporters of SB 601 say the bill is a response to a 2023 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court and to a second Trump ...
Some results have been hidden because they may be inaccessible to you
Show inaccessible results
Feedback