Conservatives for Property Rights Urge White House Support for Patent Reform
Where's the Left's Outrage Over This Florida Shooting?
From Madison to Minneapolis: One Leftist's Mission to Stop ICE
Two Wisconsin Hospitals Halted 'Gender-Affirming Care' for Minors, but the Fight Isn't Ove...
Dilbert Creator Scott Adams Has Died at 68
Here's the Insane Reason a U.K. Asylum Seeker Was Spared Jail Despite Sex...
Trump to Iran: Help Is on the Way
Trump’s Leverage Doctrine
Stop Pretending That Colleges Are Nonprofit Institutions
Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on Whether States Can Ban Men From Women’s...
Federal Reserve Chairman ‘Ignored’ DOJ, Pirro Says, Necessitating Criminal Probe
Iran Death Toll Tops 12,000 As Security Forces Begin to Slaughter Non-Protesting Civilians
If Bill Clinton Thought He Could Just Not Show Up for His House...
The December Inflation Report Is Here, and It's Good News
The GOP Is Restoring the American Dream of Homeownership
Tipsheet

The EPA vs. Private Property

Should the EPA be able to control how you use your private property? Well, right now it can, but that is being challenged in the Supreme Court. Over at Reason, Damon W. Root reports that next month, the Court will hear arguments for Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency.

Advertisement

 

The case started four years ago when a married couple named Mike and Chantell Sackett received an EPA compliance order instructing them to stop construction on what was supposed to be their dream home near Priest Lake, Idaho. The government claimed their .63-acre lot was a federally-protected wetland, but that was news to the Sacketts, who had procured all the necessary local permits. Their lot, which is bordered by two roads and several other residential lots, was in fact zoned for residential use.

The Sacketts contend that the compliance order was issued erroneously and they would like the opportunity to make their case in court. Yet according to the terms of the Clean Water Act, they may not challenge the order until the EPA first seeks judicial enforcement of it, a process that could take years. In the meantime, the Sacketts risk $32,500 in fines per day if they fail to comply. And complying doesn’t just mean they have to stop building; they must also return the lot to its original condition at their own expense.

Moreover, if they did eventually prevail under the current law, the Sacketts would then need to start construction all over again. By that point they would have paid all of the necessary compliance costs plus double many of their original building expenses. And who knows how much time would have been lost. Where’s the due process in that? The Sacketts understandably want the right to challenge the government’s actions now, not after it’s become too late or too expensive for them to put their property to its intended use.

Advertisement

Related:

EPA

The Fifth Amendment states that "No person shall be...deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." But the EPA wants to issue compliance orders without its subjects being able to retaliate via judicial review. And now a couple trying to build a home on their private property are being issued fines and orders left and right. They can't challenge the EPA without the EPA's permission-even if the original compliance order was issued in error. It's good to see that the Sacketts will get their day in court.

As for the EPA, it may not be the largest agency, but when it can control private property while exempting itself from the courtroom, that's still dangerous.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos