Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency
GPTKB entity
Statements (59)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instance_of |
gptkb:court_cases
|
| gptkbp:case_analysis |
Relevant to environmental law debates.
Analyzed under the Clean Water Act. |
| gptkbp:case_impact_on_law |
Influenced environmental law enforcement.
|
| gptkbp:case_number |
10-354
Involved a dispute over land use. Sackett's land was deemed a wetland. |
| gptkbp:case_outcome |
Court ruled Sackett could challenge EPA.
Decision clarified EPA's jurisdiction. Effect on future EPA compliance orders. Majority opinion emphasized property rights. Ruling favored property owners. Sackett's right to develop land upheld. Significant for property rights. Strengthened property rights. Sackett had the right to challenge EPA's compliance order. |
| gptkbp:case_significance |
Influenced future environmental litigation.
Significant for property rights and environmental law. |
| gptkbp:consequences |
Implications for federal regulatory power.
|
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:Washington,_D._C.
Administrative law case |
| gptkbp:date |
January 9, 2012
|
| gptkbp:decided_by |
gptkb:United_States_Supreme_Court
|
| gptkbp:dissenting_opinion |
gptkb:Justice_Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg
|
| gptkbp:effective_date |
March 21, 2012
|
| gptkbp:environmental_concerns |
Regulation of wetlands.
|
| gptkbp:environmental_impact |
Development on wetlands
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency
|
| gptkbp:involved_parties |
gptkb:Sackett_family
gptkb:Environmental_Protection_Agency |
| gptkbp:judged_by |
Judgment favored property owners.
|
| gptkbp:judicial_review |
Allowed judicial review of EPA orders.
Expanded scope of judicial review. |
| gptkbp:legal_context |
Environmental law
Context of federal environmental law. |
| gptkbp:legal_framework |
Expanded rights for property owners.
Federal environmental regulations. Impact on EPA's regulatory authority. |
| gptkbp:legal_issue |
gptkb:Clean_Water_Act
Arguments centered on EPA's authority. Challenged EPA's compliance order. |
| gptkbp:legal_outcome |
Increased scrutiny of EPA's jurisdiction.
|
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
gptkb:Pacific_Legal_Foundation
|
| gptkbp:location |
gptkb:Idaho
|
| gptkbp:material |
Background involved land development.
|
| gptkbp:outcome |
Court ruled in favor of Sackett
|
| gptkbp:precedent |
gptkb:Administrative_Procedure_Act
Property owners can challenge EPA orders. Set precedent for future EPA cases. |
| gptkbp:public_interest |
Property rights vs. environmental protection.
|
| gptkbp:public_perception |
gptkb:Justice_Antonin_Scalia
|
| gptkbp:regulatory_compliance |
EPA's authority over wetlands
|
| gptkbp:related_cases |
gptkb:Rapanos_v._United_States
|
| gptkbp:significance |
Clarified jurisdiction of the EPA
|
| gptkbp:year |
gptkb:2012
|
| gptkbp:bfsParent |
gptkb:Neil_Gorsuch
gptkb:Sonia_Sotomayor gptkb:Brett_Kavanaugh |
| gptkbp:bfsLayer |
4
|