Comments on: The Supreme Court Term In Review, Part I: The Environment http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/07/01/scotus-environment/ Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:42:01 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Uncle Ho http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/07/01/scotus-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-154987 Uncle Ho Wed, 01 Jul 2009 18:38:29 +0000 http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/?p=17272#comment-154987 Rachel Carson sadly weeps in her grave. Rachel Carson sadly weeps in her grave.

]]> By: ccsmith http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/07/01/scotus-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-154986 ccsmith Wed, 01 Jul 2009 18:11:52 +0000 http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/?p=17272#comment-154986 I find it incredulous that this out of control branch of government has acquired so much power over the years. Even Thomas once said, he wasn't so sure that judicial review is legit. My point is, they have alligned themselves with business interests at the expense of all else. The market and the contract have become sacrosant; at the expense of all else. I've become worried about the lack of real checks for this branch. I hope people wake up, by the way....if we think these judges have become no better than shills and we want to express our displeasure....how can we write them? Thanks I find it incredulous that this out of control branch of government has acquired so much power over the years. Even Thomas once said, he wasn’t so sure that judicial review is legit. My point is, they have alligned themselves with business interests at the expense of all else. The market and the contract have become sacrosant; at the expense of all else. I’ve become worried about the lack of real checks for this branch. I hope people wake up, by the way….if we think these judges have become no better than shills and we want to express our displeasure….how can we write them?
Thanks

]]> By: rjwalker http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/07/01/scotus-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-154982 rjwalker Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:02:40 +0000 http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/?p=17272#comment-154982 I believe the Couer Alaska summary here is misleading, and, in my opinion, is as open to criticism as right wing claims, say, that Sotomayor was undercut by the S Ct's Rici reversal. I believe it is important to accurately portray court decisions - to do otherwise brings unwarranted disrespect to the court. (Yeah, they screw some stuff up, e.g., <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-332.ZS.html" rel="nofollow">Justice Thomas in the <em>Earls</em></a> student drug testing case, but I believe it wrong to dis them when they present a reasonable, albeit mislead, basis for their holdings.) The change in lake depth was a fact - which in turn was the basis for, in the Court's view, the 'waste' discharge program subject to EPA or Corp of Engineers regulation under the jointly devised definitions. "The regulatory scheme discloses a defined, and workable, line for determining whether the Corps or the EPA has the permit authority. Under this framework, the Corps of Engineers, and not the EPA, has authority to permit Coeur Alaska’s discharge of the slurry." I disagree with the majority's reasoning, but it is not without reasonable basis. And besides, this case provides a great opportunity to demonstrate that "judicial activism" is a perfectly traditional aspect of our legal system, and, like other actions by the branches of government, <a href="http://rjw-progressive.blogspot.com/2009_04_01_archive.html" rel="nofollow">subject to checks and balances. </a> Congress could amend the Clean Water Act's definitions and/or provision to "over-rule" the S Ct. respectfully I believe the Couer Alaska summary here is misleading, and, in my opinion, is as open to criticism as right wing claims, say, that Sotomayor was undercut by the S Ct’s Rici reversal.

I believe it is important to accurately portray court decisions – to do otherwise brings unwarranted disrespect to the court. (Yeah, they screw some stuff up, e.g., Justice Thomas in the Earls student drug testing case, but I believe it wrong to dis them when they present a reasonable, albeit mislead, basis for their holdings.)

The change in lake depth was a fact – which in turn was the basis for, in the Court’s view, the ‘waste’ discharge program subject to EPA or Corp of Engineers regulation under the jointly devised definitions.

“The regulatory scheme discloses a defined, and workable, line for determining whether the Corps or the EPA has the permit authority. Under this framework, the Corps of Engineers, and not the EPA, has authority to permit Coeur Alaska’s discharge of the slurry.”

I disagree with the majority’s reasoning, but it is not without reasonable basis.

And besides, this case provides a great opportunity to demonstrate that “judicial activism” is a perfectly traditional aspect of our legal system, and, like other actions by the branches of government, subject to checks and balances.

Congress could amend the Clean Water Act’s definitions and/or provision to “over-rule” the S Ct.

respectfully

]]>