Last month the U.S. Supreme Court restricted federal jurisdiction over filling and altering wetlands. See Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 21-454 (U.S. May 25, 2023). The president promptly expressed both disappointment and concern that the government could no longer assure protection of wetlands, and therefore surface water quality. You may have received fundraising emails from environmental groups declaring Sackett to be a “disaster for Pennsylvania.”

But the practicing bar has to advise our clients: private, public and NGO. The Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law extends the Department of Environmental Protection’s jurisdictional reach to all “waters of the commonwealth.” Those waters are understood to be more inclusive than the federal jurisdictional limit under any reading. So if Pennsylvania still regulates the same broad set of wetlands and other waters, does Sackett change anything in Pennsylvania?

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]