Supreme Court limits EPA authority in San Francisco sewage dispute – Washington Examiner
On March 4, 2025, teh Supreme Court ruled in favor of the City and County of San Francisco in a case against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), determining that the EPA had overstepped its authority under the Clean Water act. The 5-4 decision, led by Justice Samuel Alito, stated that the EPA could not impose vague water quality standards on San Francisco without clearly defining the necessary steps for compliance. This ruling effectively nullified provisions that held San Francisco’s wastewater facilities liable for overall water quality in the Pacific Ocean without clear guidelines.
The majority opinion emphasized that it is the EPA’s duty to create specific compliance measures, rather than imposing broad mandates that could led to severe penalties for non-compliance. Justice Alito was supported by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and neil Gorsuch.
In dissent, Justice amy Coney Barrett argued that the Clean Water Act dose grant the EPA extensive authority to impose more stringent requirements for water quality standards, cautioning that the ruling might weaken protections for the habitat.
The case, known as *City and County of San Francisco v. EPA*, highlights a significant limitation on the EPA’s enforcement abilities, notably regarding municipal wastewater and stormwater management, and follows a trend of the Court narrowing the authority of regulatory agencies involved in environmental protection.
Supreme Court limits EPA authority in San Francisco sewage dispute
The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the Environmental Protection Agency overstepped its authority under the Clean Water Act by imposing unclear water quality standards on San Francisco, siding with the city in its appeal of a lower court ruling.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the 5-4 majority decision, stating that the Clean Water Act does not permit the EPA to hold a permit holder responsible for the overall water quality of a receiving body, in this case, the Pacific Ocean, without specifying the exact steps required for compliance.
“Determining what steps a permittee must take to ensure that water quality standards are met is the EPA’s responsibility, and Congress has given it the tools needed to make that determination,” Alito wrote in City and County of San Francisco v. EPA. He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch.
The ruling strikes down EPA-imposed provisions that required San Francisco’s wastewater treatment facilities to avoid contributing to any violation of applicable water quality standards or creating pollution under California law. The city argued these vague mandates could lead to harsh penalties without clear guidance on how to comply.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, authored the dissent, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Barrett argued that the Clean Water Act explicitly gives the EPA broad authority to impose “any more stringent limitation” necessary to ensure compliance with water quality standards. She warned the ruling could weaken environmental protections.
The so-called “end-result” issue centers on the EPA holding San Francisco responsible for overall water quality without specifying how to do so. Under the Clean Water Act, permits limit pollutant discharges, but the EPA created additional vague rules, making the city liable if ocean water failed quality standards regardless of whether it followed all permit terms.
The Supreme Court ruled this exceeded EPA authority, reaffirming that the agency must set clear rules for permit holders rather than imposing broad mandates.
JUSTICES CRITICAL OF SAN FRANCISCO LAWSUIT AGAINST EPA
The decision marks the first major Clean Water Act case since the 2023 Sackett v. EPA case, where the justices narrowed the definition of federally protected wetlands, continuing a trend of limiting agency power over environmental regulation.
The ruling on Tuesday is likely to constrain future EPA enforcement efforts, particularly in regulating municipal wastewater and stormwater discharges.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...