The Future of Wetlands Regulation in a Post-Rapanos World

Sacramento Lawyers Chapter - Environmental Law Practice Group

Speakers include:

• Reed Hopper, Pacific Legal Foundation, argued Rapanos for the landowner
• Roderick E. Walston, former acting solicitor of the U.S. Department of the Interior and Best Best & Krieger
• Jonathan Foster, Wetlands Project Manager, Jones & Stokes

Speakers include:

• Reed Hopper, Pacific Legal Foundation, argued Rapanos for the landowner
• Roderick E. Walston, former acting solicitor of the U.S. Department of the Interior and Best Best & Krieger
• Jonathan Foster, Wetlands Project Manager, Jones & Stokes

In the year since the Supreme Court's decision in Rapanos v. United States and Carabel v. United States, the state of the federal government's regulation of wetlands remains in flux. The Court was badly split in a 4-1-4 decision that struck down the Corps of Engineers' assertion of jurisdiction over the Michigan landowner petitioners. But the Court failed to provide a single clear test for the determination of the extent of federal jurisdiction over wetlands that are not adjacent to navigable waterways.

The Federalist Society is sponsoring this panel debate to help resolve, or at least better define, the terms of this dispute. Questions that will be addressed include:

• Which Supreme Court opinion should control -- the plurality's or Justice Kennedy's concurrence?
• Will the Corps issue regulations or guidance that comport to the Supreme Court's opinion?
• What tests should regulations employ for determining the reach of the Corps' jurisdiction?
• What are the post-Rapanos trends in the lower federal courts?
• Can the States step into the breach left by the Corps if nonadjacent wetlands are not regulated by the federal government?

Cost: $25.00 ($10.00 for law students) for a buffet dinner and 2 hours of MCLE credit

RSVP to: Jim Burling at Pacific Legal Foundation ([email protected])