Missing Case, Mixed Facts: Supreme Court Environmental Analysis Review

Summary

• The Sackett ruling immediately lifted Clean Water Act protections from vast categories of wetlands, with environmental groups warning it would end protections for millions of acres of wetlands and small streams nationwide.
• A proposed WOTUS rule released November 2025 would formally codify Sackett's restrictions, reducing the number of projects requiring federal dredge-and-fill permits and water quality certifications — the primary tools against wetland destruction.
• Post-Sackett regulatory fragmentation is severe: 24 states operate under the Biden-era WOTUS rule while 26 states operate under pre-2015 rules, creating inconsistent protection depending on geography.
• The Loper Bright decision's practical impact is already visible: the EPA announced 31 deregulatory actions in March 2025, including rollbacks of air and water pollution restrictions, and signaled reconsideration of power plant, oil and gas, coal ash, and wastewater regulations.
• The article's critics are partially correct that specific quantitative data (exact acreage developed, measurable pollution increases) remains incomplete, but the directional evidence of substantial, concrete protection loss is well-documented across wetlands, permitting, and air quality regulation.

What Environmental Protections Have Been Lost or Weakened in Practice?

The article's critique is fair — the Supreme Court rulings on Sackett v. EPA and Loper Bright v. Raimondo are not merely abstract legal shifts. They have triggered a cascade of concrete, measurable regulatory rollbacks with real-world consequences for wetlands, waterways, air quality, and pollution oversight. Here is what the data shows.

---

Wetlands and Clean Water Act Protections (Post-Sackett)

The Sackett ruling was sweeping in its practical effect. The Supreme Court issued a 9-0 decision in May 2023, ruling that Clean Water Act (CWA) protections apply only to wetlands with a "continuous surface water connection" to navigable waters. Justice Alito's majority opinion narrowed the definition of "waters" to mean only "relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water" — streams, rivers, lakes, and oceans in the most conventional sense.

This immediately lifted CWA jurisdiction over vast categories of wetlands that had previously been federally protected. Environmental groups have stated that the downstream regulatory changes would end protections for millions of acres of wetlands and small streams across the country.

The legal fallout has also created a fragmented regulatory landscape: due to ongoing post-Sackett litigation, 24 states are currently operating under the Biden-era 2023 WOTUS rule, while 26 states are operating under pre-2015 WOTUS rules — a patchwork that leaves the scope of federal protection highly variable depending on geography.

The on-the-ground confusion is illustrated vividly by a case in Idaho, where in May 2025, the Army Corps of Engineers designated 1.13 acres belonging to Caleb and Rebecca Linck as wetland subject to CWA authority — despite the land being hundreds of feet from the nearest stream and 2 miles from the nearest lake — suggesting that even post-Sackett enforcement remains inconsistent.

---

Proposed WOTUS Rule: Formalizing the Rollback

On November 17, 2025, the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers released a sweeping proposed rule to formally revise the federal definition of "waters of the United States" (WOTUS) in line with Sackett, limiting federal jurisdiction to "relatively permanent" waters and wetlands with a "continuous surface connection." The EPA had previously issued guidance restricting protected wetlands to only those that directly abut navigable waterways.

If finalized, this rule would reduce the number of projects requiring Section 404 dredge-and-fill permits and Section 401 water quality certifications — the primary federal tools used to prevent wetland destruction by developers. The administration has framed this as "cooperative federalism," deferring more authority to states and tribes. Critics, however, note that many states lack the resources or political will to fill the regulatory gap left by federal withdrawal.

---

Air Quality and Broader Deregulation (Post-Loper Bright)

The Loper Bright decision, which overturned the Chevron deference doctrine, has had broader implications beyond fisheries. By eliminating the principle that courts should defer to federal agencies' expert interpretation of ambiguous statutes, it has weakened the legal foundation for a wide range of EPA regulations.

The practical consequences are already visible: on March 12, 2025, the EPA announced 31 separate deregulatory actions, including rollbacks of restrictions on air and water pollution. The EPA simultaneously announced it would reconsider regulations covering power plants, the oil and gas industry, wastewater regulations for coal power plants, and coal ash programs. Without Chevron deference, each of these regulatory frameworks is now more legally vulnerable to court challenges — precisely the mechanism Loper Bright empowered.

---

What Remains Unclear

The article's critics are right that specific quantitative data — acres of wetlands developed, measurable changes in water quality metrics, or emissions increases attributable to these rulings — are not yet fully compiled in the public record. The proposed WOTUS rule was still in its comment period as of late 2025, meaning its final form and full impact are still being determined. The 26-state regulatory patchwork also makes national aggregate data difficult to assess. These are genuine evidentiary gaps, though the directional evidence of significant protection loss is well-supported.