October Term 2005 · Docket 04-1034
Does the Clean Water Act cover wetlands isolated from navigable waters?
The dispute centers on whether federal agencies can regulate wetlands that lack a direct hydrological connection to navigable waters.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Hopper argued the agencies pushed the limits of congressional authority contrary to the statute's text.
General Clement cited a prior unanimous decision upholding jurisdiction over adjacent wetlands.
Mr. Stoepker stated the record shows the wetlands are hydrologically isolated from navigable waters.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 29-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 29-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 49-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 49-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 21-43 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 21-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 45-3 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 45-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-15 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 21-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 21-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 13-31 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 13-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 9-25 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 9-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 27-3 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 27-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 3-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 23-35 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 23-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 45-54 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 45-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 65, lines 25-37 — Transcript, file page 65, lines 25-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 65, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 65, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 1-19 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 1-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 31-39 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 31-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 49-54 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 49-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 41-47 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 41-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-21
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests the scope of federal power over water pollution. the sides that brought the case argue the agencies exceeded their authority. The government argues the agencies acted within their legal mandate.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 29-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 29-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 21-43 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 21-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-15 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 49-54 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 49-54
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 21, 2006.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 43-45
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want the Court to limit federal jurisdiction to waters with a clear connection to navigable streams.
The government wants the Court to uphold the agencies' broad interpretation of the Clean Water Act.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 29-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 29-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 21-43 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 21-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-15 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 49-54 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 49-54
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue the agencies ignored the plain text of the statute and overreached their authority.
The government argues the agencies properly regulated wetlands adjacent to navigable waters to protect water quality.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 29-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 29-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 21-43 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 21-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-15 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 49-54 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 49-54
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia asked if proving discharge into a tributary suffices to prove a violation.
Justice Ginsburg asked where the line should be drawn for major tributaries.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 49-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 49-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 45-3 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 45-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 21-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 21-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 13-31 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 13-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 9-25 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 9-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 27-3 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 27-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 3-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 23-35 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 23-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 45-54 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 45-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 65, lines 25-37 — Transcript, file page 65, lines 25-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 65, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 65, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 1-19 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 1-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 31-39 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 31-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 41-47 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 41-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-21
Why it matters
The outcome defines the boundary of federal environmental regulation. It determines which wetlands fall under federal protection. It impacts landowners and state regulators nationwide.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 29-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 29-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 21-43 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 21-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-15 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 49-54 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 49-54
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 49-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 49-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 45-3 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 45-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 21-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 21-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 13-31 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 13-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 9-25 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 9-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 27-3 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 27-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 3-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 23-35 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 23-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 45-54 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 45-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 65, lines 25-37 — Transcript, file page 65, lines 25-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 65, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 65, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 1-19 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 1-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 31-39 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 31-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 41-47 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 41-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-21
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 29-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 29-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 21-43 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 21-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-15 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 49-54 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 49-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 29-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 29-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 21-43 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 21-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-15 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 49-54 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 49-54
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.