The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case concerning the Clean Water Act, initiated by San Francisco against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This case, added to the docket for the 2024-25 term, will examine whether the limitations imposed in the permit for San Francisco’s wastewater discharges into the Pacific Ocean are too vague. Specifically, the controversy centers on the “narrative” limitations that prohibit discharges causing or contributing to violations of water quality standards and creating pollution or contamination as defined by state law. More details can be read on the original article by Amy Howe.
On the same day, the justices declined several high-profile petitions, including challenges to bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines in Illinois, and bans on gender-affirming care for minors in Tennessee and Kentucky. In other notable developments, the Supreme Court denied review in the case of Rodolfo Medrano, sentenced to death for his role in a 2003 gang robbery that led to six fatalities, and Michael Avenatti, who sought to challenge his conviction related to extortion and fraud charges involving Nike. A detailed breakdown of these decisions is available here.
Justice Neil Gorsuch dissented in the Court’s decision to not review the constitutional question of whether the right to a trial by a 12-person jury is guaranteed in felony cases. The question was brought forward by Natoya Cunningham, who was convicted by a six-person jury. Gorsuch criticized the Supreme Court’s precedent, set in Williams v. Florida, which allows six-person juries and called for a reconsideration of this ruling, suggesting that there might be an eventual push for change. More on this topic can be found here.
The forthcoming term’s only addition, San Francisco’s Clean Water Act case, will likely offer significant implications for how water quality standards and regulatory clarity are interpreted under federal and state law. Keep an eye on SCOTUSblog for further updates as the case progresses.