Court divided over wetlands protections

Cross posted in LBN as well

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2346484

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/20/washington/20wetlands.html?hp&ex=1150862400&en=144cd29fb90fcd6d&ei=5094&partner=homepage

The Supreme Court on Monday came close to rolling back one of the country's fundamental environmental laws, issuing a fractured decision that, while likely to preserve vigorous federal enforcement of the law, the Clean Water Act, is also likely to lead to new regulatory battles, increased litigation by property owners and a push for new legislation.

With four justices on one side arguing for a sharp restriction in the definition of wetlands that are subject to federal jurisdiction, and four justices on the other arguing for retaining the broad definition that the Army Corps of Engineers has used for decades, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy controlled the outcome in a solitary opinion.

Environmental advocacy groups reacted to the decision, which sends the cases back to an appeals court, as if they had dodged a bullet, which in many respects they had. An opinion for four justices, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, would have stripped protection from many areas that federal regulators have treated as wetlands under the 1972 law.

(On edit: somehow I doubt anyone is concerned with weltands protections in this forum...)