Unanimity Doesn’t Mean Supreme Court Agrees Completely

Cases and Controversies

· Court clips EPA authority over clean water

· Chides local government on home seizure

Although Supreme Court justices were unanimous in backing landowners in a Big EPA case, their reasoning in the latest check on administrative authority shows there is still deep division.

Styled as a concurrence, Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s opinion in Sackett v. EPA on how to determine whether the agency can regulate certain bodies of water read more like a dissent. Joined by the three liberal justices, Kavanaugh accused the five other conservatives of creating a test that is “overly narrow and inconsistent with the Act’s coverage of adjacent wetlands.”

The progressive-leaning Constitutional Accountability Center’s Miriam Becker-Cohen joins “Cases and Controversies” to discuss that case and the other May 25 rulings.

Hosts: Kimberly Robinson and Greg Stohr

Guest: Miriam Becker-Cohen, Constitutional Accountability Center

Producer: Matthew S. Schwartz