Following the Supreme Court ruling in the Sackett v. EPA case, Rinke Noonan Law Firm attorney Kale Van Bruggen said there was a four-part agreement on the controlling opinion. “There are three separate concurring opinions with additional commentary. It is not a unanimous per curiam result, but it was at least unanimous in the outcome.” This ruling considered EPA’s jurisdiction over wetlands determinations. Van Bruggen said the nexus analysis was very unclear. “It was almost impossible for a landowner or a farmer to quickly and efficiently decide which wetlands are regulated.” Van Bruggen expects changes to be made to EPA’s WOTUS rules that were released earlier this year. Listen to the full interview with Kale Van Bruggen here.
Subscribe to RRFN
Get a weekly digest from RRFN to stay up-to-date on all the latest news in agriculture.