1、1 33 U.S.C. 1344(a).2 United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes, Inc., 474 U.S. 121 (1985).3 CWA 502(7); 33 U.S.C. 1362(7).Congressional Research Service ? The Library of CongressCRS Report for CongressReceived through the CRS WebOrder Code RS20779January 12, 2001The Supreme Court Rules Against Corps
2、 ofEngineers Jurisdiction over “Isolated Wetlands”:The SWANCC Decision(name redacted)Legislative AttorneyAmerican Law DivisionOn January 9, 2001, the Supreme Court handed down the latest in its series of recentdecisions relating to the balance between federal and state power in our dual system ofgov
3、ernment. In Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers, the Court ruled that the long controversial “migratory bird rule,” usedby the Corps of Engineers to interpret its authority over “isolated wetlands,” exceeded theagencys authority under the Clean Water Ac
4、t (CWA). Background of the case. SWANCC, a consortium of Chicago cities and villages,sought to develop a landfill for baled nonhazardous solid waste on a 533- acre parcel inIllinois. The parcel had been used for sand and gravel mining until about 1960. Sincethen, the excavation trenches had evolved
升级VIP 