unilaterally expand the definition of “waters of the United States,” thereby expanding their jurisdictional powers, coupled with their control every aspect of the permitting process, including the discretion to decide whether to refer a violation for prosecution, and allowing the Corps to make unreviewable quasi-jurisdictional determinations as to whether a particular parcel of property is subject to its jurisdiction under the CWA, the Corps and EPA, in effect, are the judge, jury and executioner. The structural limits on the exercise of constitutional power were not proposed because the founders were “anti-government” or as a way to upset democratic self-governance. The framers of the Constitution understood the need for a national government …show more content…
In Rapanos, the Corps sought to include within its CWA jurisdiction any land containing a channel through which rainwater might occasionally flow. The plurality in Rapanos would have held that, in order to assert jurisdiction, the agencies must establish a “continuous surface connection” between the property in question and traditionally navigable interstate waters.” By contrast, Justice Kennedy’s significant nexus test would require a more complicated assessment of the “chemical, biological and hydrological connection between the property and other regulated waters.” Under both tests, the burden of proof rests on the agency asserting jurisdiction. Although the Corps purports to rely on Justice Kennedy’s “significant nexus” formulation, their claim of jurisdiction in such cases deprives that formulation of any meaning. Thus, the Supreme Court recently noted, the jurisdictional “reach of the [CWA] is notoriously unclear.” Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, 132 S.Ct. 1367, 1375 (2012) (observing that “[a]ny piece of land that is wet at least part of the year is in danger of being classified…as wetlands covered by the Act…”). As the Corps continuously expands definition of “waters of the United States,” and so does it expand its jurisdictional
Webster argued the Constitution was design to settle such economic disputes between states. Allowing concurrent laws to conflict would be dangerous and contagious if not handled by the federal government. Attorney Writ supported the federal supremacy over these states was enumerated in the Constitution. Gibbons’ steamboats operated “among several states” (US National Archives & Records Administration n.d.), and the Commerce Clause states, “ Congress shall have the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among several States, and with Indian tribes” (US National Archives & Records Administration n.d.). Gibbons’ steamboats in fact operated in New Jersey and in New York; therefore it aptly applied in this situation.
The United States of America between the time period of 1800-1835 were creating the first modern democracy. They had a separation of powers by creating a Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary Branch. The Legislative branch being the the Senate and House of Representatives, the Executive branch being the President and his advisors, and the Judiciary branch being the Supreme court. The Supreme Court informed and validated all the laws. In the end, the Supreme Court in many of their cases like Gibbons v. Ogden, McCulloch v. Maryland, Marbury v. Madison, and Cohens v Virginia made decisions that sought to assert federal power over state laws and the primacy of the judiciary in determining the meaning of the constitution.
New York, the Supreme Court ruled on many different cases that surrounded states’ involvement in economics and business industry. Kens details how all these cases effected Lochner v. New York. In the book, Kens addresses the debate that many believe that the Supreme Court used laissez faire ideas to rule, Kens states that the court at the time upheld state regulatory measures more often than overturning them. However, Kens does give an overall sense that the court under Fuller did follow the ideas of social Darwinism, illustrating that after changes in justices the Supreme Court would rule in favor of regulations similar to the Lochner case. Kens concludes with the effects Loch v. New York had on later cases and how there is still a debate as to whether the court ruled fairly, using the Fourteenth Amendment to overrule state legislation on workplace
The United States Constitution was created to define the powers and limitations of the government. It replaced the Articles of the Confederation, and was ratified by all 13 states in 1787 (American Government, n.d.). The ratification of the Constitution was not without opposition, and the government was split into two groups: federalists, and anti-federalists. The federalist group believed that a national governing body, ruled by the elite class was necessary. Antifederalists, on the other hand, believed that state governments should have more say, and that the government should be run by ordinary people (American Government, n.d.).
By the 1980s, perspectives had changed and legal challenges and policy questions arose about licensing a dam in a national park. After several years of political processes, Congress settled the issue in 1992. According to the Elwha River Ecosystem and Fisheries Restoration Act (1992), the main purpose of removal of the project dams is for the full restoration of the Elwha River ecosystem and native anadromous fisheries. The consideration for acquisition of the Projects shall be $29.5 million and no more, to be paid by the Secretary to the owner and local industrial consumer (Elwha River Ecosystem and Fisheries Restoration Act,
In the brief film “Gibbons vs. Ogden”, the conflict of how New York Steamboat Law seems to interfer with the Federal Coastal Act was adressed. The basics of this case are, The captain of the ship, Bellona, was reported as unlawfully operating a steam boat; he did not have a licenense. Confused, he stated he did have a license to navigate on the United States ocean, the Constable responded with the phrase, New york has jurdiction of the new york waters, Gibbons was furious. In 1789 a New York Steamboat Act was passed, stating, anybody who would be driving through the Waters of New York would need a license from Livingston and Futon. After futher discussion, it was discovered, that the Federal Coasting Act is unconstitutional.
The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branch were created and they all have equal powers. Federalist No. 51 states, “It is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others … But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others.” The Anti-Federalists believed the executive branch had too much power and that it became a monarch government. Richard Henry Lee's Objections to the Constitution states, “In the new Constitution, the President and Senate have all the executive, and two thirds of the legislative power.
Carr (1962). Plaintiff Charles Baker, mayor of Millington, Tennessee, challenged the Tennessee General Assembly for not adhering to the requirement to redraw legislative districts every ten years. The Supreme Court was to decide whether the redistricting of state legislative districts is a “political question” or an issue that can be resolved by federal courts. In American Constitutional law, the political question doctrine is closely linked to the concept of justifiability, or in other words, whether a court system should have the authority to here a particular case in the matter. In this particular case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the redistricting of state legislative districts does not qualify as a political question.
I. Case Assignment Elements A. Introduction Altemio Sanchez a fifty-eight-year-old male of Hispanic descent also known as the Bike Path Killer was born on January 19, 1958. He was originally born in Sabastian, Puerto Rican but later moved to New York. B. Intelligence, Scholastic achievement, social adjustment in school Altemio graduated from Grover Cleveland High School where he was very involved and played sports. He was enrolled at Buffalo State College in an industrial Arts program later dropped out when his girlfriend Kathleen Whitley became pregnant and later married at twenty-two years old. C. Family structure and environment Sanchez is the youngest of four siblings of his brother and two sisters.
This policy brief examines the Water Works v. Drainage Districts legal battle from earlier this year. The Iowa Supreme Court declared that the drainage districts were not responsible for the $80 million that Water Works paid to remove excess nitrates from agricultural runoff in the Raccoon River, which supplies drinking water to half a million Iowans 2. Water Works claims that nitrate pollution from agricultural runoff in Sac, Calhoun and Buena Vista counties violated the U.S. Clean Water Act (CWA) 1. The 1972 CWA exempts runoff from farms, which are not considered as “point sources” of pollution 1. Water Works would like to see runoff from tile drainage considered as a point source, due to the pollution of groundwater which is protected
The Commerce clause refers to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, which gives Congress the power “to regulate commerce with foregin nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes”. This clause is one of the most fundamental powers delegated to congress by the founders. It has helped to seprate the powers between the federal governemtn and the states, along with the branches of governemtn and Judiciary. In simpler terms the commerce clause was to help regulate commerce among navigable waters.
Have You Ever Wondered How The Constitution Guarded Against Tyranny? Have you ever wondered how the constitution guarded against tyranny? This was the main question facing the 55 delegates at the constitutional convention held in philadelphia in 1787. Their job was to “frame a government that was strong enough to serve the needs of the new nation, and yet did not create any kind of tyranny.” , (Background Essay).
DBQ Essay The United States Constitution is a document that or founding fathers made in order to replace the failing Articles of Confederation (A of C). Under the Constitution, the current government and states don’t have the problems they faced when the A of C was in action. The Constitution was created in 1788, and held an idea that the whole nation was nervous about. This idea was a strong national government, and the Federalist assured the people that this new government would work. The framers of the Constitution decided to give more power to the Federal government rather than the state governments because the A of C had many problems, there was a need for the layout of new government, rights, and laws, and there was a need for the Federal
“The purpose of the United States Constitution is to limit the power of the federal government not the American people.” – The Federalist Papers. Our government is not the exact same way it was from the very beginning of its creation. It has changed dramatically over the course of about two-hundred years, as said in the video, “The Constitution must change for challenges in the future.” Truthfully, it has been changed and adapted to meet the ever changing needs of our society.
This court ruling is a slap in the face of humanity” (Gordon, Tacoma,