The Rapanos Decision

The initial news that the Supreme Court ruled against the federal government’s assertion of near-unlimited jurisdiction over wetlands under the Clean Water Act was encouraging — even if Justice Kennedy provided the fifth vote in a separate concurrence. Then I read the decisions. I plan to ponder them some more, but my initial take is that the landowners won the battle but lost the war, largely because of how much leeway Justice Kennedy’s pivotal opinion gives to the government. I summarized my initial reactions on Volokh here .

For other reactions to the case, check out GMU law professor Ilya Somin (here ), the Cato Institute’s Mark Moller (here and here ), and the Pacific Legal Foundation’s Rapanos Blog. The opinions themselves are availabel here .

Jonathan H. Adler — Jonathan H. Adler teaches courses in environmental, administrative, and constitutional law at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law.

Most Popular


Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More
Film & TV

Black Panther’s Circle of Hype

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing. This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its ... Read More