By Lauren Keller '26
Most societies are founded upon guiding principles. As Brain Gremlin aptly notes in the second installment of the “Gremlins” franchise, civilization can be defined by “diplomacy, compassion, standards, manners, tradition…” among so many other things. (1) But each of these segments of civilization and society is well-defined and specific, lacking any ambiguity that would obscure its message to an audience.
The Fifth Amendment promises that people will not be “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,” (2) heavily inspired by John Locke’s philosophy that governments should exist only with the consent of the governed and that rules should refrain from ambiguous wording for the sake of equity. (3) This brings up San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a case in which the city alleges that the existing regulations for managing wastewater are too ambiguous to be properly abided by.
In San Francisco v. EPA, the city asked the Supreme Court to instruct the EPA to issue specific regulations for permissible water pollution levels. Currently, the city follows generic prohibitions stating that San Francisco may not violate existing water quality standards set by the Clean Water Act; however, this does not define numerical or narrative thresholds for existing water quality standards to protect the environment efficiently. On the contrary, these generic regulations result only in lawsuits and fines covered by taxpayer money, which is then made payable to the EPA.
In its argument, San Francisco articulates that the Clean Water Act does not empower the EPA to impose generic prohibitions. (4) The city claims the current permit scheme leaves the municipality subject to unpredictable and lofty fines because the NPDES permit does not specifically clarify what amount of untreated sewage can be released into local waterways.
David Chiu, San Francisco’s attorney, said, “[This case] asks the [Supreme] Court to ensure EPA follows the Clean Water Act and gives permitholders clear standards that actually prevent water pollution before it happens… San Francisco is asking [the] EPA to do its job to protect the environment.” (5)
On the other side of the courtroom, the EPA argues that the Clean Water Act gives the agency sufficient authority to impose limitations that do not spell out specific limits for pollution as “Congress used more expansive language [in their description of the EPA’s powers], authorizing EPA to impose ‘any more stringent limitation, including those necessary to meet water quality standards’ or ‘required to implement any applicable water quality standard.’” (6)
During oral arguments, Frederick Liu, an assistant to the solicitor general representing the EPA, claimed that forbidding generic prohibitions would require the EPA to gather more information as it crafts specific regulations, which would delay permit approvals and “lead to less flexibility and more burdens for the dischargers… [The] whole point of the general permit is that the dischargers can get away with not providing us a lot of information. That's how you get a construction site approved in 14 days.” (7)
Justice Kavanaugh pushed back on San Francisco’s argument stating, “[Farmers and small business owners] say that your position will make it impossible for many permittees to protect themselves from unanticipated liability.” (8)
Kavanaugh raises a strong point about how a person, business, or other entity could not protect themselves from a liability claim they were unaware of but responsible for following. Many cities across the country have found that unknowingly violating water quality standards set by the EPA has led to fines and associated legal battles costing anywhere between tens of thousands to millions of dollars. (9)
Three months after oral arguments for San Francisco v. EPA were heard, Florida—alongside a few other states rebuilding after a particularly turbulent hurricane season—enacted a rule that guarantees the approval or denial of construction permits within 30 or 60 business days, a time frame depending on the size of the building in question. (10) Florida House Bill 267, which went into effect earlier this year, lays the groundwork for state governments' direction with issues like permit approval. While speed and clarity are on opposing sides of San Francisco v. EPA, the solution will likely be found in a compromise between both parties. States such as Florida lead the way by showing that both timely permit approvals and clear regulatory standards can be upheld. While the outcome of this case is still unknown, the permit approval process will likely improve alongside a call for more detailed regulations from the EPA.
Perhaps Brain Gremlin was onto something when he shared the sentiments of himself and his fellow Gremlins to the residents of Manhattan: What we want is, I think, what everyone wants… civilization.
Endnotes
“Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990) - Quotes - IMDb,” IMDb, n.d. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099700/quotes/?item=qt0342601.
“Fifth Amendment,” LII / Legal Information Institute, n.d. https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment.
“Locke’s Political Philosophy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy),” October 6, 2020. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-political/.
US EPA. “Summary of the Clean Water Act | US EPA,” June 12, 2024. https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-water-act.
S.F. City Attorney’s Press Office. “San Francisco Files Final Brief in SCOTUS Case to Protect Utility Ratepayers from Massive Bill Increases,” September 26, 2024. https://www.sfcityattorney.org/2024/09/26/san-francisco-files-final-brief-in-scotus-case-to-protect-utility-ratepayers-from-massive-bill-increases/.
PRIETO, JEFFREY, DIMPLE CHAUDHARY, MEGHAN E. GREENFIELD, STEVEN M. NEUGEBOREN, DAWN M. MESSIER, ALEXIS S. WADE, POOJA S. PARIKH, et al. “BRIEF FOR THE RESPONDENT.” In The Supreme Court of the United States (Environmental Protection Agency, 2024), 22.
C-Span, “[City and County of San Francisco V. Environmental Protection Agency] Oral Argument,” C-SPAN.Org, October 16, 2024. https://www.c-span.org/program/public-affairs-event/city-and-county-of-san-francisco-v-environmental-protection-agency-oral-argument/648568.
Ibid.
Ibid.
“Chapter 553 - 2018 Florida Statutes - the Florida Senate,” n.d. https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2018/Chapter553.
Comments