Legal scholars with Institute for Biodiversity Law and Policy at Stetson Law, NYU School of Law’s Institute for Policy Integrity, highlight flaws in Clean Water Rule suspension
Two new amicus briefs written by the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law and the Institute for Biodiversity Law and Policy at Stetson University College of Law are asking the federal district court in New York to consider the scientific and economic damage of suspending the 2015 Clean Water Rule.
The Clean Water Rule was designed to protect the streams and wetlands on which Americans’ health and economy depend. The Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are now considering repealing that rule. While no repeal has been finalized, the agencies added an “applicability date” to the Clean Water Rule in February of 2018, suspending it for two years.
Several states and organizations have filed suit against the Trump administration for the suspension. Professor Royal Gardner and Erin Okuno of Stetson’s Biodiversity Institute co-authored an amicus brief filed on behalf of the Society of Wetland Scientists. The Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law also filed a brief in opposition to the suspension of the Clean Water Rule.
“Every aspect of the Clean Water Act’s implementation requires the use of science,” said Stetson Law professor Royal Gardner. “When the agencies disregard science, their judgments deserve no deference.”
Bethany Davis Noll, litigation director at the Institute for Policy Integrity, explained that “the benefits of protecting wetlands under the Clean Water Rule outweigh the costs by a substantial amount. In ignoring those benefits now, the agency has violated longstanding principles of administrative law.”
Contact: Brandi Palmer
Stetson University College of Law
Contact: Derek Sylvan
New York University School of Law
Post date: May 15, 2018