Readers will remember the Sandia Tea Party reported on the fight between the Sackett’s and the EPA and the real stubbornness on the part of the government (access article here). Tthe crux of the argument was whether a property owner could have quick access to the courts to present their case before the EPA (in this case) could run roughshod over the citizens (Sacketts).
Below you’ll find an excerpt from an article reporting the SCOTUS decision on the case:
The Supreme Court has sided with an Idaho couple in a property rights case, ruling they can go to court to challenge an Environmental Protection Agency order that blocked construction of their new home and threatened fines of more than $30,000 a day.
Wednesday’s decision is a victory for Mike and Chantell Sackett, whose property near a scenic lake has sat undisturbed since the EPA ordered a halt in work in 2007. The agency said part of the property was a wetlands that could not disturbed without a permit.
You can read the rest of the story from here.
Don’t forget to follow the related articles below:
- Justices criticize EPA’s dealings with homeowners (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
- You: Supreme Court takes up property rights dispute (latimes.com)
- Supreme Court Justices Blast EPA For Thwarting Couple From Building On Protected Wetlands (businessinsider.com)
- Justices lay into EPA over homeowners’ case (cbsnews.com)
- Supremes hostile to EPA in wetlands case (junkscience.com)
- Case ignites conservative ire over EPA (junkscience.com)
- Some Folks Should Just Stay Home (gadabout-blogalot.com)
- Supreme Court Finally Smacks Down EPA (rogueoperator.wordpress.com)