This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Environmental & Energy

Feb. 22, 2019

Clarifying the Clean Water Act

SCOTUS has decided to hear an important 9th Circuit appeal regarding whether the Clean Water Act covers indirect discharges of pollutants. The grant allows the Court to clean up something of a muddy jurisprudence, after the last major water decision, 'Rapanos v. U.S.,' fractured the justices and left uncertainty as to which opinion controls. We present competing views from the attorney for environmental plaintiffs, David Henkin (Earthjustice), and from Andre Monette (Best Best & Krieger), who represents a cohort of public agency amici.

David L. Henkin

Staff Attorney, Earthjustice, Mid-Pacific

Andre Monette

Partner, Best Best & Krieger LLP



Brian Cardile

Rulings Editor, Podcast Host, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reporter

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor: