Pueblo, Colo., District Attorney Watching Wetlands Case
By Chris Woodka, The Pueblo Chieftain, Colo.
Feb. 22–Pueblo’s district attorney is watching a U.S. Supreme Court case involving wetlands because it could weaken the federal Clean Water Act.
“I don’t know with certainty if it would affect the lawsuit on Fountain Creek, because it seems to be a different type of case,” District Attorney Bill Thiebaut said Tuesday. “But in general, it shows the tone of the attack on the Clean Water Act.”
Thiebaut is suing Colorado Springs in federal court over repeated sewage spills into Fountain Creek. A central point of the lawsuit is that the state has not done enough to enforce the Clean Water Act.
A similar suit has been filed by the Sierra Club.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard opening arguments on how far upstream the federal government should extend protection under the 1972 act.
The Supreme Court, in two Michigan wetlands cases, is seeking to clarify whether building projects can be barred from property adjacent to tributaries that dump into waterways.
Conservation groups argue the Clean Water Act could be further weakened after a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling in 2001 determined the act did not give the government authority over wetlands used by migratory birds, but isolated from navigable rivers.
Pro-business groups cast the case as a battle of property rights and federalism, saying state governments should regulate wetlands not directly connected to navigable rivers.
Justices were divided, based on comments at Tuesday’s hearing.
Justice David Souter suggested that limiting the law’s reach could allow an “end-run around the regulation” by polluters.
“All you have to do is dump the pollutant upstream far away from the watershed and you get away scot-free,” Souter said.
But Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia questioned whether an overly broad interpretation of the law might give regulators jurisdiction over storm drains and ditches.
“To call that waters of the United States seems to be extravagant,” Scalia said.
“At some point the definition of tributary has to have an end” or it would go beyond the intention of Congress, Roberts said.
Thiebaut is concerned a decision could affect a lawsuit he filed in October.
“We’re on a different track, but it’s important the Supreme Court acts to protect the Clean Water Act,” Thiebaut said. “If they erode the act on this issue, it could affect other parts of the act as well.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
—–
To see more of The Pueblo Chieftain, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.chieftain.com.
Copyright (c) 2006, The Pueblo Chieftain, Colo.
Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.
For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.