Abstract
Part I of this Article discusses the functional role of wetlands in meeting the intended purpose of the Clean Water Act (“CWA”). The intended purpose of the CWA is to "restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Nation's waters." The Court's decision in Sackett undermines the intended purpose of the CWA. Wetlands play an essential role in meeting this objective. Wetlands are hydrologically connected to and an embedded part of the overall aquatic ecosystem. The Sackett decision leaves wetlands subject to further degradation.
Part II of this Article provides an overview of the CWA, how we came to define "navigable waters" or "waters of the United States," and the wetlands cases to come before the Court. The cases evidence the Court's progression towards the rejection of ecological considerations and hydrological connectivity as relevant to CWA jurisdictional determinations. The Court's opinion in Sackett creates a complete disconnect between the law and science necessary to protect the nation's waters. Part III discusses how to better equip state conservation agencies to "fill the gap" left by Sackett.
Recommended Citation
Shawna Bligh,
Sustaining America's Non-Jurisdictional Wetlands Post-Sackett Through Conservation,
92
UMKC L. Rev.
789
(2024).
Available at:
https://irlaw.umkc.edu/lawreview/vol92/iss4/6
Included in
Business Organizations Law Commons, Civil Procedure Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Environmental Law Commons, Fourteenth Amendment Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, Water Law Commons