U.S. Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) just attacked the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court following a recent decision with which he disagrees.
Schumer did so in a message that he posted to Twitter on Thursday, May 25.
He wrote:
This MAGA Supreme Court is continuing to erode our country’s environmental laws. Make no mistake—this ruling will mean more polluted water, and more destruction of wetlands. We’ll keep fighting to protect our waters.
There is something, however, that Schumer conveniently omits from his message.
The case at issue regards the expansive definition that President Joe Biden's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has put forth for the 1972 Clean Water Act's (CLW) "Waters of the United States" (WOTUS).
Biden's EPA has changed the definition of WOTUS such that it includes wetlands, lakes, ponds, streams, and "relatively permanent" waterways. In other words, the EPA has broadened the scope of WOTUS so that it can regulate more waterways than it would have been able to under the old definition.
The EPA's new definition of WOTUS was challenged. And, Fox News reports that the U.S. Supreme Court just struck the new definition down in a 9 to 0 decision.
Twitter felt the need to supply this missing piece of information from Schumer's post. Citing the New York Times, the added context reads:
All 9 judges agreed that the EPA overstepped its authority and that the plaintiffs' property should not be subject to EPA regulation. However, 4 judges disagreed with the majority's opinion on the limits of EPA authority with respect to wetlands.
This is what Schumer conveniently left out of his message: The decision was unanimous. It was not the decision of a "MAGA Supreme Court" - unless liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson have suddenly changed their ways.
Schumer's tweet, though, is even more ridiculous than it might first appear.
Twitter's added context points out that four of the "judges actually disagreed with the majority's opinion on the limits of EPA authority with respect to wetlands."
Those four justices were the court's three liberal members and Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
So, not only did the liberals join with the conservatives with regard to the case's 9 to 0 decision. But, Kavanaugh - a conservative - also joined with the liberals in disagreeing with part of the majority's decision.
In other words, what happened, in this case, is about the furthest thing possible from a "MAGA Supreme Court."
