Long overdue.

Imagine being so partisan brainwashed that you support the pollution of the place you live just because the other party opposes it.

No. Don't be an ignorant, mouth-breathing ---- and flail your semi-translucent forearms and wrists.

This has nothing to do with industrial pipes of methyl-ethyl death streaming toxic wastes into navigable waterways.

The Natural World that exists outside whatever urban -------- you live in doesn't have engineered drainage. It has these things called "rivers", or "creeks", or "draws", or "ditches", or "washes", or "gulleys", or "bayous", or "tenches", or "potholes", or "playas", or......etc.

The case stems from a long-standing issue regarding where the assertion of federal jurisdiction (via the CWA) stops.

There's no reason to go through a 404 Permitting process to throw a couple of culverts into a ditch or draw that maybe flows three times a year just so you can build a little place to cross without tearing up your vehicle.

Uncertainty in interpretation becomes particularly more acute west of the 98th Meridian.

The only impact of this decision will be that thousands of people who were potentially in violation of the CWA (as currently interpreted and enforced by the Corp of Engineers) can no longer potentially be targeted by "their" Federal Government.

And a Fun Fact:

Most of the aforementioned "thousands of people potentially targeted" are people who do more real things in one day to protect and preserve surface water than ----------- could every just type about on the internet in a lifetime.

Shut the ---- up, Pussoir. You're such an insufferable little bourgeois sack of ----.

We will never in our lifetimes experience another cogently crafted piece of legislation like the Clean Water Act.

It was passed in an era when the Legislative Branch still played a legitimate role. But its scope was huge and was passed politically--and then delegated to Federal Agencies for interpretation and rulemaking. The political appointees of these Agencies drive the bus with regards to the promulgation of new rules.

Regulatory language regarding what specific location in a watershed is under Federal Jurisdiction has to be practically interpreted by both Ecologists and COE Bureaucrats. I loved Justice Kennedy, but his "significant nexus" test was not good law.

The job of the Supreme Court is to bitch slap all of that back into reality when it gets out of hand.

And it just did its job.

I don't agree with Mao's rhetoric but I tend to agree with his sentiments.

My "rhetoric" and "sentiments" are a function of common sense.

Let us amend the legislation if we don't like the ruling.

Make your case.