“The Sackett” Ruling; the tides are turning, to a sea of change.................

Ever Hear of “The Sackett” Ruling? Well, if not, you should sit up and take notice because with the Sackett's winning against a Federal Entity, the EPA; I suspect, the tides are turning, to a sea of change, in a domino effect, as others will re-examine the governments rule over “the people's rights.” Backing up a couple of years ago, one has to examine the Governments first Clean Water Act of 1972 & its land to water grab that has followed.

Now to present day starting around 2005 and ending with a US Supreme Court ruling:

 Mike and Chantell Sackett, like many of us married couples, had a dream of owning their own piece of paradise. The couple loved to fish but more importantly, loved nature and the outdoors. That is why they purchased a lovely parcel of property near Priest Lake, Idaho. The lake is known for its boating, fishing, hiking, camping, snowmobiling, hunting, cross-country skiing; get the picture? So too did the Sackett's! The Priest Lake Chamber of Commerce bills it as a place where “Mother Nature Vacations.” What a wonderland to settle down in and build your wonderland! The 2/3rd acre parcel was located within a new development, other homes too were there and about to be there; too include theirs. As with any home, the lot needed to be leveled and fill put in. Just after leveling and filling their dream lot, the US Corp. of Engineers and the EPA showed up in a fever ordering all activities to stop and the land was to be restored back to its original appearance as it was a natural wetlands. How could this be a wetlands if the parcel was located within a subdivision that was established in the 1980's. The other problem is also compounded by the fact that there is not a good definition from Congress as to what a wetlands constitutes. In the Sackett's case, there were no soil tests, no scientific evidence in proving it was a wetlands and only the EPA's say so, which is a over  reach of EPA oversight!




Devastated and not knowing what to do, the Sackett's met the compliance in as much as to stop building their dream home and ask the EPA as to why this was such ordered? When the parcel was purchased, it was not listed as a wetlands, nor were such found in the subdivision? Why were they being sectioned out? As they had no standing water or any continuously flowing water on their property, the Sackett's decided to challenge the EPA on its “wetlands determination” and have their day in court. As time was fleeting by, the fines of $37,500 a day, were too piling up for not doing the restoration of their own lands because the EPA said so. The Sackett's tried appeals on their fines and decisions by the EPA but were told in vain, EPA decisions are not applicable to any appeal when wetlands are of concern. Like a chess game, the Sackett's took their appeal to court, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals; check, as it was ruled that “landowners had no right to appeal an EPA order involving wetlands, until fines have been assessed.” This was yet to be over, as how could this happen in America and yet nothing could be done? Be Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead! As the Sackett's took the case to the US Supreme Court! It is a scary world when a government-funded organization can have no judicial oversight, such as with the EPA, except from within their own confines of themselves. If this were Roman times, the EPA would be considered a God! Thank God it is not and thank God for the Sackett's in taking it to the U.S. Supreme Court, as with their winning against the EPA, it now sets a precedents as the tides are turning, to a sea of change. Mike Sackett on "Sackett V EPA" with Tom Sullivan, as of March 22, 2012: Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, in a major judiciary decision, the Sackett's had the right to file suit against the EPA, under the Administrative Procedures Act. This was made possible because the EPA's order was final against the Sackett's, too which also had fines levied against them and the EPA used in their defense, the Clean Water Act, which was and is not exempt from judicial review. He also noted that, Congress should review the Clean Water Act and write in new legislation in determining as too a definition that clearly defines just to what extent the Clean Water Act may be used for against landowners. No longer may the EPA make outrageous and arbitrary commandments resulting in daily fines greater than the value of the property by use of the Clean Water Act. The Sackett's just wanted a dream home back in 2005 but because the EPA said so, they stole their dream, in the name of conservation, at the administrative level, with no judicial oversight. In short, the EPA does not believe the Constitution applies to them. Now, with this decision, maybe, the Sackett's can build their dream home, sometime soon and through their brilliant actions and their attorney's at Pacific Legal Foundation, others too may build upon their dreams, as this could bring in a sea of change................. Sackett: A Supreme Case for Liberty Thank God we have God & a Constitution to which some of us still believe in...Yesterday, the 23'rd of March was the birth of that famous oration from Patrick Henry’s speech with its closing argument of Give me Liberty or Give me Death; the Sackett's have restored a piece of Liberty, once again to us all! Devastated and not knowing what to do, the Sackett's met the compliance in as much as to stop building their dream home and ask the EPA as to why this was such ordered? When the parcel was purchased, it was not listed as a wetlands, nor were such found in the subdivision? Why were they being sectioned out? As they had no standing water or any continuously flowing water on their property, the Sackett's decided to challenge the EPA on its “wetlands determination” and have their day in court.



 As time was fleeting by, the fines of $37,500 a day, were too piling up for not doing the restoration of their own lands because the EPA said so. The Sackett's tried appeals on their fines and decisions by the EPA but were told in vain, EPA decisions are not applicable to any appeal when wetlands are of concern. Like a chess game, the Sackett's took their appeal to court, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals; check, as it was ruled that “landowners had no right to appeal an EPA order involving wetlands, until fines have been assessed.” This was yet to be over, as how could this happen in America and yet nothing could be done? Be Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead! As the Sackett's took the case to the US Supreme Court!



 It is a scary world when a government-funded organization can have no judicial oversight, such as with the EPA, except from within their own confines of themselves. If this were Roman times, the EPA would be considered a God! Thank God it is not and thank God for the Sackett's in taking it to the U.S. Supreme Court, as with their winning against the EPA, it now sets a precedents as the tides are turning, to a sea of change. Mike Sackett on "Sackett V EPA" with Tom Sullivan, as of March 22, 2012:



 Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, in a major judiciary decision, the Sackett's had the right to file suit against the EPA, under the Administrative Procedures Act. This was made possible because the EPA's order was final against the Sackett's, too which also had fines levied against them and the EPA used in their defense, the Clean Water Act, which was and is not exempt from judicial review. He also noted that, Congress should review the Clean Water Act and write in new legislation in determining as too a definition that clearly defines just to what extent the Clean Water Act may be used for against landowners. No longer may the EPA make outrageous and arbitrary commandments resulting in daily fines greater than the value of the property by use of the Clean Water Act. The Sackett's just wanted a dream home back in 2005 but because the EPA said so, they stole their dream, in the name of conservation, at the administrative level, with no judicial oversight. In short, the EPA does not believe the Constitution applies to them. Now, with this decision, maybe, the Sackett's can build their dream home, sometime soon and through their brilliant actions and their attorney's at Pacific Legal Foundation, others too may build upon their dreams, as this could bring in a sea of change................. Sackett: A Supreme Case for Liberty



Thank God we have God & a Constitution to which some of us still believe in...Yesterday, the 23'rd of March was the birth of that famous oration from Patrick Henry’s speech with its closing argument of Give me Liberty or Give me Death; the Sackett's have restored a piece of Liberty, once again to us all!