Environmental -- 2018

Murray Energy Corp. v. EPA   (6th Circuit)

Rule broadening definition of "waters of the United States"

The NAM intervened in a group of consolidated cases challenging a final rule from the EPA defining its jurisdiction over navigable “Waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act (CWA). Federal law specifies that, while most lawsuits are filed in federal district courts, some suits must be filed directly in the federal courts of appeals. The statute that provides appellate jurisdiction for certain challenges to EPA regulations does not apply to the WOTUS challenge, though the EPA argued that it did. Prompt resolution of this jurisdictional issue was important so that the WOTUS case could proceed expeditiously through the courts. The NAM’s brief explained that certain legal challenges, such as this issue, belong in the federal district courts and argued that this is not the type of appeal from agency rulemakings under the CWA that is limited to the federal appeals courts by statute. On January 22, 2018, the Supreme Court held that jurisdiction properly belongs in the federal district courts.

Related Documents:
Industry brief on the merits  (November 1, 2016)


National Association of Manufacturers v. U.S. Dep't of Defense   (U.S. Supreme Court)

Appeal of Waters of the United States (WOTUS) jurisdictional issue

The MCLA secured a 9–0 victory in the U.S. Supreme Court that resolved a procedural obstacle that had delayed the appropriate federal court from considering legal challenges to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) 2015 “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) Rule. This legal win cleared the path for the MCLA’s lawsuit to invalidate the rule to proceed in federal district court, where the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas ultimately invalidated the rule and remanded it back to the EPA for reproposal.

Related Documents:
NAM merits reply brief  (September 11, 2017)
NAM merits brief  (April 27, 2017)