Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency

In Sackett v. EPA, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on May 25, 2023, in favor of Michael and Chantell Sackett, Idaho landowners who had been barred by the EPA from building on their residential lot because the agency classified the property as wetlands subject to Clean Water Act permitting. The Court unanimously held that the EPA overstepped its authority. Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion, establishing that only wetlands with a continuous surface connection to relatively permanent bodies of water that are themselves waters of the United States qualify for federal protection. The ruling rejected the "significant nexus" test and narrowed federal wetlands jurisdiction nationwide.

The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that the EPA lacked jurisdiction over the Sacketts' property because the wetlands on their land did not have a continuous surface connection to a relatively permanent waterbody. The Court adopted the "continuous surface connection" test, overturning the significant nexus standard and remanding the case.

The central dispute was the proper interpretation of "waters of the United States" under the Clean Water Act, specifically whether wetlands that are not directly adjacent to navigable waters but have a significant ecological connection to them can be regulated by the federal government. The case challenged the EPA's use of the "significant nexus" standard.

The decision significantly reduced federal authority over isolated wetlands and ephemeral streams, affecting landowners, developers, farmers, and environmental regulators. It prompted the EPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to revise their Waters of the United States rule, leading to increased litigation and uncertainty over wetland protection across the country.