When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (2012) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sackett_v._Environmental...

    Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency , 566 U.S. 120 (2012), also known as Sackett I (to distinguish it from the 2023 case ), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that orders issued by the Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Water Act are subject to the Administrative Procedure Act . [ 1 ]

  3. Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (2023) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sackett_v._Environmental...

    Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, 598 U.S. 651 (2023), also known as Sackett II (to distinguish it from the 2012 case), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that only wetlands and permanent bodies of water with a "continuous surface connection" to "traditional interstate navigable waters" are covered by the Clean Water Act.

  4. Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sackett_v._Environmental...

    Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency may refer to either of two United States Supreme Court cases: Environmental Protection Agency (2012) (alternatively called Sackett I ), 570 U.S. 205 (2013), a case in which the Court ruled that orders issued by the EPA under the Clean Water Act are subject to the Administrative Procedure Act .

  5. Oyez, oyez, oyez: A listener's guide to Supreme Court ... - AOL

    www.aol.com/news/oyez-oyez-oyez-listeners-guide...

    The Supreme Court hears arguments Thursday over whether former President Donald Trump can be kept off the 2024 ballot because of his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, culminating in ...

  6. Supreme Court limits EPA protection for wetlands, favoring ...

    www.aol.com/news/supreme-court-limits-epa...

    In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court limits federal protection for wetlands in a property rights case, saying the Clean Water Act does not usually apply to the marshy areas.

  7. images.huffingtonpost.com

    images.huffingtonpost.com/2012-08-30-3258_001.pdf

    Created Date: 8/30/2012 4:52:52 PM

  8. Alexander v. Sandoval - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_v._Sandoval

    In his dissent, Justice Stevens explained the Cannon decision as follows: In providing a shorthand description of her claim in the text of the opinion, we ambiguously stated that she had alleged that she was denied admission "because she is a woman," but we appended a lengthy footnote setting forth the details of her disparate impact claim.

  9. What is affirmative action? Policy explained in simple terms

    www.aol.com/news/affirmative-action-policy...

    News of the Supreme Court ruling that affirmative action in higher education is unconstitutional has catapulted the policy that was legal for at least 45 years to the forefront.