Summary
In a 5-4 decision, the US Supreme Court weakened the Clean Water Act by limiting the EPA’s authority to issue generic water quality standards.
The majority, led by Justice Alito, ruled that the EPA must impose specific pollutant limits instead of broad, “end result” requirements. The city of San Francisco prevailed, challenging the EPA’s narrative-based permits for sewage discharges.
Dissenters, led by Justice Barrett, argued the law authorizes stronger measures to protect water supplies.
The case marks the first significant Clean Water Act challenge since Chevron deference was overturned in 2024.
Shithole country. Literally.
Its not as if this saves money. It just shifts the expense. Purified water treatment plants are going to have to compensate for increasingly contaminated source water. I’d wager this will negatively impact nitrification. Just pollution for no societal gain. Greed, I assume.
Ugh. I think I’ve hit my limit for bad news today. Be well, all.
Mmm, this Freedom Water tastes amazing
It’s got electrolytes!
“Let them drink shit.”
- Clarence Thomas probably
ruled that the EPA must impose specific pollutant limits instead of broad, “end result” requirements.
Any scientists out there who can talk to the specifics of this?
To a layman like me, this seems like six and a half of one, a half a dozen of another.
Is asking for specificity a bad thing, scientifically and environmentally speaking?
In a 5-4 ruling written by Justice Samuel Alito, the court blocked the EPA from issuing permits that make a permittee responsible for surface water quality, or “end result” permits – a new term coined by the court.
I also don’t know, but get really suspicious if Alito needs to invent a “new term” to frame the case with
I also don’t know, but get really suspicious if Alito needs to invent a “new term” to frame the case with
Yeah, there’s definitely a " ‘WTF?’ Factor" going on with that.
I can’t wait to hear what the Legal Eagle on YouTube says about that.
I haven’t read the exact statutes, so take what I say with a grain of salt.
Some compounds, like phosphates and nitrates, are well studied, and so experts can put limits in place that they know will result in good outcomes. Unfortunately, there are an infinite number of potential contaminates someone could dump into a body of water, so for anything less well studied, it’s really hard to make limits. The EPA apparently just set a backstop that said something along the lines of “whatever you put in the water has to still result in good water quality”.
Now that the Supreme Court has shut that down, a polluter can put anything in the water that isn’t specifically disallowed. For a (fake) example, maybe Forever Chemical x2357-A is shown to hurt wildlife at concentrations over 2 parts per billion (after lots of expensive, taxpayer funded research), so the EPA rules that they have to keep it below 2 ppb. The company could adjust their process so their waste is Forever Chemical x2357-B instead, and they can release as much as they want.
The EPA basically just gets forced to play whack-a-mole spending lots of money to come up with specific rules to the point that they can’t actually do their jobs.
Something something “drain the swamp”.
The joke about Republicans letting the likes of Bronzo the Clown take a shit in their mouth if they thought a liberal would have to smell it now became very close to literally true.
“Not having to eat actual shit from our water supply is just a lot of woke bullshit!” -magamorons, probably
Why don’t we just drain the swamp right into the drinking water supplies of schools? It’s a win-win-win!
Will getting cholera make eggs affordable?
More deaths, less consumers?
I guess the invisible hand of the market belongs to Death
This decision doesn’t sound like its in the best interest of the people. And no corporations are not people. This can only end badly.
Nothing learned:
This is a completely separate issue…?
Entering Flavor Country
If the EPA are the experts wouldn’t it make sense they should set specific requirements for water safety? What am I missing here?
You’re missing that SCOTUS has taken the mask off and is complicit in the destruction of the regulations for the benefit of their elite donors. (Yes I know they don’t campaign, yes I know what I said. Watch John Oliver talk about RV’s if you need more context.)
Yes California has one Sewage Crisis. But what about Second Sewage Crisis?
Get your RO systems now before they are tariffed.
Time to start clogging the pipes
This cornucopia of corruption is unprecedented. It seems we’re seeing all of his buyers receiving their benefits in real time.
That’s shitty.
