David Mandelbaum, Greenberg Traurig. Wetlands Regulation in Pennsylvania After 'Sackett' Ruling
Close analyses of the Supreme Court's opinions abound. Therefore, I offer only a brief thumbnail here. Section 301 of the federal Clean Water Act prohibits discharges of pollutants from a "point source" to "navigable waters" without a permit.
June 29, 2023 at 10:46 AM
8 minute read
Last month the U.S. Supreme Court restricted federal jurisdiction over filling and altering wetlands. See Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 21-454 (U.S. May 25, 2023). The president promptly expressed both disappointment and concern that the government could no longer assure protection of wetlands, and therefore surface water quality. You may have received fundraising emails from environmental groups declaring Sackett to be a "disaster for Pennsylvania."
But the practicing bar has to advise our clients: private, public and NGO. The Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law extends the Department of Environmental Protection's jurisdictional reach to all "waters of the commonwealth." Those waters are understood to be more inclusive than the federal jurisdictional limit under any reading. So if Pennsylvania still regulates the same broad set of wetlands and other waters, does Sackett change anything in Pennsylvania?
This content has been archived.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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Over 700 Residents Near 2023 Derailment Sue Norfolk for More Damages
3 minute read
Neighboring States Have Either Passed or Proposed Climate Superfund Laws—Is Pennsylvania Next?
7 minute read
No Pa. Case Has Ever Adjudicated a Claim to Enforce an Environmental Covenant Imposed Under 'Act 2'—Does That Matter?
7 minute read Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Eight Years On, A&O Shearman’s Fuse Legal Tech Incubator is Still Evolving
- 2Google Makes Appeal to Overturn Jury Verdict Branding the Play Store as an Illegal Monopoly
- 3First Amendment Litigator Returns to Gibson Dunn
- 4In Record Year for Baker Botts, Revenue Up 11.8%, PEP Up 17.6%
- 5Loopholes, DNA Collection and Tech: Does Your Consent as a User of a Genealogy Website Override Another Person’s Fourth Amendment Right?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
