Liberal Urban Leadership!
By 
The Supreme Court sided with San Francisco on Tuesday in a challenge to water quality regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency in a ruling that could have sweeping implications for the agency’s ability to limit offshore pollution.
The 5-to-4 decision dealt another blow to the agency, which has recently sustained several losses before the court over its efforts to protect the environment.
The case was notable because it created unusual alliances. Liberal San Francisco found itself on the same side as mining and petroleum trade groups like the National Mining Association, American Farm Bureau Federation, and American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers in opposing the E.P.A.
The dispute fundamentally focused on human waste and how San Francisco disposes of it. The question before the court was whether the Clean Water Act of 1972 allowed the E.P.A. to impose prohibitions on wastewater released into the Pacific Ocean and to penalize the city for violating them.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., writing for the majority, said the E.P.A. was entitled to impose specific requirements to prevent pollution but not to make polluters responsible whenever water quality generally falls below the agency’s standards.
“When a permit contains such requirements,” he wrote, “a permittee that punctiliously follows every specific requirement in its permit may nevertheless face crushing penalties if the quality of the water in its receiving waters falls below the applicable standards.”
Incidentally, the 4th vote here in favor of the EPA was Barrett, who again proves less than insane on certain regulatory issues.