Last Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the EPA in a case involving the Clear Water Act, the “Waters of the U.S.” Rule, and the agency’s broad interpretation and strict enforcement of protecting wetlands.
“The clarification is a Godsend—nothing less, nothing more—it’s a Godsend,” says Ted McKinney, CEO of the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA). McKinney is also a native of Tipton County and served as USDA Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs during the Trump administration.
He applauds the Supreme Court’s ruling and agrees that the EPA was “inconsistent” with its protection of wetlands.
“This was a major case for all of us in agriculture and particularly for our farmers, landowners, and those who believe that there is some value in how States look at this,” says McKinney. “Many tried to get this averted—to try to have the EPA not take this back up, but here we are. For the Supreme Court to clarify, particularly the Nexus Rule, is powerful. It’s so significant for all farmers, ranchers and people in agriculture.”
McKinney says the court’s ruling proves that producing food and protecting our nation’s waterways are two tandem efforts, not two competing interests.
“We’ve got to be producing food, fiber, fuel, and so many other things. When you have this kind of competition—the likelihood that lawyers galore were going to be making a new industry out of identifying what is and what is not eligible for production—is significant,” says McKinney.
Now, McKinney says that he and others will be working with the EPA to provide feedback to re-write WOTUS regulations.
“I do not revel that the EPA got it wrong—they did. Now, the work is not done. They have to go rewrite the regulations, albeit with a more narrow interpretation, and we’ll be right there working with them,” says McKinney. “We’re thrilled and relieved that this is behind us and we can go forward. It’ll be a more narrow interpretation that allows States to do what States do well, lets the federal government—in this case, the EPA—do what they do well, and take some relief off of the farmer and rancher as they try to figure out how to do their work on the farms.”
McKinney adds that the goal now is to update and implement a regulatory framework that better reflects the needs of farmers, ranchers and landowners.
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Sackett v. EPA, Indiana Farm Bureau President Randy Kron released the following statement:
“Indiana Farm Bureau is pleased that the Supreme Court, in Sackett v. EPA, has narrowed the reach of the ineffective federal clean water regulations. This is a victory for Indiana farmers who, for far too long, have had to deal with complicated and overreaching regulations on their farms. This ruling narrows the jurisdictional reach of the Clean Water Act and protects private property rights. Now farmers across the country can breathe a sigh of relief as we have been given the clarity we have been seeking and the federal government’s overreach has been put in check. We now know that wetlands need a continuous surface connection to navigable waters to be regulated. The Indiana Agricultural Law Foundation was proud to support this significant case.”
Click below to hear C.J. Miller’s full interview with NASDA CEO Ted McKinney.
