Waters of the United States: Theory, Practice, and Integrity at the Supreme Court

31 Pages Posted: 13 Jul 2006

See all articles by Jamison E. Colburn

Jamison E. Colburn

The Pennsylvania State University (University Park) – Penn State Law

Abstract

In the Court's two wetlands cases last Term, a question of statutory interpretation divided the justices sharply, in part because so much rides on the particular statutory provision at issue. The provision, a cryptic definition within the Clean Water Act (CWA), has now provided three separate occasions at the Court where the justices have confronted (1) the Chevron doctrine and its associated collection of precedents, and (2) the CWA's daunting goal of restoring the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters. In this essay, I argue that the way the Court went about resolving its differences is, unfortunately, instructive not just to environmental lawyers. It is illustrative of the Court's failed minimalism, disregard for its own precedents, and tired uses of semantics where truly substantive problems are confronting our society.

Keywords: Clean Water Act, wetlands, legal indeterminacy

JEL Classification: Q2

Suggested Citation

Colburn, Jamison E., Waters of the United States: Theory, Practice, and Integrity at the Supreme Court. Florida State University Law Review, Vol. 33, 2007, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=913738

Jamison E. Colburn (Contact Author)

The Pennsylvania State University (University Park) – Penn State Law ( email )

Lewis Katz Building
University Park, PA 16802
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
150
Abstract Views
830
Rank
352,966
PlumX Metrics