Judge blocks EPA’s new Clean Water Rule

August 31, 2015

A large number of states have been up in arms about the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s new Clean Water Rule, claiming that it's a huge overstep in federal power, and that the level of regulation the EPA was trying to enable with it is best left to state and local governments. It's been an uphill battle for them, but it looks as if their side of the issue has finally landed a victory, even it's only temporary.

On August 27, Judge Ralph Erickson granted the preliminary injunction demanded by North Dakota and a dozen other states currently suing the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers over June's Waters of the United States rule. 

Erickson wrote in his opinion that he believed the states likely to succeed in their claims against the government, mostly because, in his eyes, "it appears likely that the EPA has violated its Congressional grant of authority in its promulgation of the Rule at issue."

Building on that, he added that "The risk of irreparable harm to the states is both imminent and likely. More importantly, delaying the rule will cause the agencies no appreciable harm. Delaying implementation to allow a full and final resolution on the merits is in the best interests of the public."

North Dakota's case is one of 10 currently fighting the Waters of the United States Rule. Altogether, 31 states are suing the federal government.

Because of how rapidly they can change, staying on top of and following EPA regulations and policies can be difficult and time consuming. Hiring environmental consultants can help you better understand the latest government trends and regulations, and find quick, cost-effective ways to meet them.