Attorneys filed written arguments with a North Dakota judge Tuesday as to whether his temporary injunction blocking EPA’s Clean Water Rule should apply to all 50 states.
U.S. District judge Ralph Erickson last week issued the injunction requested by 13 states to stop the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers from implementing the rule, also known as Waters of the U.S. The EPA maintained that injunction only applies to the 13 states involved in that particular lawsuit and said it would proceed with enforcement of the rule in all other states.
In court documents filed Tuesday, lawyers for the 13 states argued that because many states share drainages in the same watershed, having a different set of rules for neighboring states is unworkable.
There’s been no indication as to when Judge Erickson will issue a ruling on this latest request.
In an interview with Brownfield earlier this week, Nebraska attorney general Doug Peterson said the battle over the Clean Water Rule comes down to one word—“power’.
“I think with the federal government, their biggest concern here is that the Environmental Protection Agency—and I think it probably goes all the way to the top of this current administration—is that they feel that they, from Washington, D.C., can manage water better among the states, than the states themselves.”
The North Dakota judge ruled that the federal government exceeded its authority in issuing the regulation. Peterson agrees.
“You’re starting to hear this phrase, ‘The Fourth Branch of Government’,” Peterson says. “Well, this is an agency applying power beyond the scope of the Clean Water Act by expanding the definition. And the only alternative we have to hold this ‘Fourth Branch’ accountable is to take them to court and say, ‘you don’t have the authority to do this—you’re acting outside the scope’.”
Nebraska is one of the 13 states involved in the North Dakota court ruling.
Source: www.brownfieldagnews.com