{"id":1478866,"date":"2024-07-23T15:05:00","date_gmt":"2024-07-23T19:05:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/?p=1478866"},"modified":"2024-07-23T15:05:00","modified_gmt":"2024-07-23T19:05:00","slug":"san-francisco-invokes-supreme-courts-bureaucracy-weakening-ruling-in-lawsuit-against-epa","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/san-francisco-invokes-supreme-courts-bureaucracy-weakening-ruling-in-lawsuit-against-epa\/1478866\/","title":{"rendered":"San Francisco Invokes Supreme Court’s Bureaucracy-Weakening Ruling In Lawsuit Against EPA"},"content":{"rendered":"

San Francisco Invokes Supreme Court’s Bureaucracy-Weakening Ruling In Lawsuit Against EPA<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

San Francisco will invoke the Supreme Court\u2019s landmark ruling from last month that weakened federal regulators\u2019 power<\/strong> in its upcoming case challenging federal wastewater discharge regulations, according to a brief that the city filed with the high court on July 19.<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

The city is arguing that Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials misinterpreted a provision of the federal Clean Water Act of 1972 when they issued a discharge permit. In issuing the permit, the officials deviated from the framework of the statute so much that they revived the old regulatory approach that the law had replaced, according to the city.<\/p>\n

The city argues that the Supreme Court\u2019s June 28 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which invalidated<\/a> the 40-year-old bureaucracy-empowering Chevron deference doctrine, has a bearing on the case.<\/strong> Critics say the now-defunct doctrine, which required judges to defer to the legal interpretations of unelected federal agency officials when enforcing federal laws that they deemed ambiguous, led to the explosive growth of the federal government in recent decades.<\/p>\n

The Loper Bright ruling is expected to be widely cited in lawsuits challenging federal regulations. It\u2019s also expected to make it more difficult for government officials to generate new regulations.<\/p>\n

The issue in the case, known as City and County of San Francisco v. EPA, is whether the agency is allowed to impose vague limitations on how much pollution may be present in wastewater discharged by water utilities.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Supreme Court granted the city\u2019s petition without comment on May 28. Oral arguments in the case haven\u2019t yet been scheduled but are expected to take place at some point during the court\u2019s new term, which begins in October.<\/p>\n

In its petition<\/a> filed on Jan. 8, San Francisco stated that the discharge permits issued by the EPA order tells cities not to pollute water bodies \u201ctoo much,\u201d but don\u2019t provide a specific limitation.<\/p>\n

According to the city, its most recent permit is one of many issued across the country that failed to notify the permit holders about what they must do to comply with the Clean Water Act.<\/p>\n

The city\u2019s permit states that San Francisco may not cause or contribute to \u201cexceedances\u201d of water quality standards. Instead of simply advising the city \u201chow much it needs to control its discharges to comply with the Act,\u201d the EPA\u2019s \u201cgeneric prohibitions leave the City vulnerable to enforcement based on whether the Pacific Ocean meets state-adopted water quality standards,\u201d the petition states.<\/strong><\/p>\n

In July 2023, a divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected San Francisco\u2019s appeal and affirmed the EPA\u2019s power to specify generic limits or \u201cgeneral narrative prohibitions\u201d on discharges under the Clean Water Act.<\/p>\n

In an April 12 brief<\/a>, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar had urged the Supreme Court not to accept the case.<\/p>\n

The permit issued to the city is sufficiently specific, she wrote.<\/p>\n

For example, it states that the discharged water cannot adversely affect the pH of the water into which it is released and that \u201cfloating particulates and grease and oil shall not be visible,\u201d Ms. Prelogar wrote.<\/p>\n

In the city\u2019s new brief<\/a>, filed on July 19, which helps to lay the foundation for its upcoming oral arguments, San Francisco argues that EPA officials misinterpreted the Clean Water Act and in the process \u201ceffectively resurrect[ed]\u201d the old regulatory regime that the statute had replaced.<\/p>\n

When the EPA renewed the city\u2019s permit \u201cto discharge treated effluent into the Pacific Ocean … EPA imposed conditions that require the City to avoid any discharge that causes or contributes to a violation of water quality standards.\u201d<\/p>\n

Effluent is liquid waste or sewage discharged into a body of water.<\/p>\n

The Ninth Circuit erred in upholding the permit conditions which \u201cimpermissibly measure the City\u2019s compliance based on whether the receiving waters meet water quality standards, instead of whether the City\u2019s discharges meet effluent limitations,\u201d according to the brief.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The agency\u2019s interpretation of the Clean Water Act makes it difficult to comply because \u201ca waterbody\u2019s ability to meet water quality standards at any time depends on pollutants that all sources\u2014not just San Francisco\u2014contribute.\u201d<\/p>\n

This means that the city doesn\u2019t have the advanced notice it needs to \u201ccontrol its discharges to comply with the Generic Prohibitions,\u201d the brief states.<\/strong><\/p>\n

On June 4, the Supreme Court directed the EPA to file its brief on the merits by Aug. 26.<\/p>\n

The U.S. Department of Justice, which is representing the EPA, didn\u2019t respond by publication time to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Tyler Durden<\/a><\/span>
\nTue, 07\/23\/2024 – 11:05<\/span><\/p>\n

\u200bhttps:\/\/www.zerohedge.com\/political\/san-francisco-invokes-supreme-courts-bureaucracy-weakening-ruling-lawsuit-against-epa<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

San Francisco Invokes Supreme Court’s Bureaucracy-Weakening Ruling In Lawsuit Against EPA Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times, San Francisco will invoke the Supreme…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":1478867,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1478866","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","wpcat-1-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1478866","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1478866"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1478866\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1478867"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1478866"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1478866"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1478866"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}