A “quagmire” of a Clean Water Act ruling that Justice Antonin Scalia wrote more than 13 years ago could now play a central role in the outcome of the U.S. Supreme Court’s most important environmental case this term.

In County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, lawyers for each side, including the United States as amicus, find support in Scalia’s plurality opinion in Rapanos v. United States. At issue is whether the federal clean water law requires certain permits when pollutants are conveyed from one source via groundwaters to navigable waters.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]