In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court ruled against the EPA’s contention that a couple does not have the right to go to court when disputing the agency. (See my previous post on the Sacketts who have been trying to build their Idaho home, but the EPA won’t let them.)buy tramadol no prescription
The Washington Post has the latest.
buy valium without prescription
The Supreme Court on Wednesday unanimously ruled for an Idaho couple who have been in a four-year battle with the Environmental Protection Agency over the government’s claim that the land on which they plan to build a home contains sensitive wetlands.buy tramadol no prescription
The decision allows Mike and Chantell Sackett to go to court to challenge the agency’s order.buy phentermine online no prescription
[…]buy klonopin online
The question for the justices was whether the couple had the right at that point to appear before a judge and contest the agency’s contention that their land contained wetlands subject to the Clean Water Act.valium for sale
Scalia joked in summarizing the decision from the bench that the Sacketts were surprised by the EPA decision that their land contained navigable waters of the United States “having never seen a ship or other vessel cross their yard.”klonopin online no prescription
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. joined in the criticism in a concurring opinion, saying the position taken by the federal government in the case “would have put the property rights of ordinary Americans entirely at the mercy of Environmental Protection Agency employees.” (Read More)
The people at the EPA think they’re above the law. This ruling says they are not.
Update: Linked by Katy Pundit – thanks!