6/1/23 – Some thoughts on the court’s decision to limit protections for wetlands
Jason, thanks for a thoughtful and somewhat hopeful newsletter on this horrible decision. It's so astounding to think that so many people fail to recognize the critical importance of wetlands and clean water. DBW
Jason, you are one of the most powerful, measured, eloquent, perceptive, and....fair-minded essayists on Substack and should be required reading for everyone in this trainwreck if the Anthropocene. I am very happy to be a paid subscriber. My heart sank when I read of the Court's decision. But it almost seemed inevitable; tragically it was no surprise. If you track the Court's rulings, both ones we agree with and ones we don't, you find that they rule for the large economic interests over the smaller (when the two are pitted against each other) the majority of times. The wetlands, had they large corporate backers would have received a far different decision most likely. The Court's deference to Congressional intent has been tenuous since the days of Antonin Scalia, great jurist that he was. I maintain, as ever, that the overarching problem in the Anthropocene is that there are just too many humans on the planet, and we all want to live comfortable lives that require enormous energy and resource and land requirements to maintain. Just too damn many of us. We're killing the current planet. But the upshot is that the changes we have set in motion will give rise to a planet with a whole lot less of us.
And a Supreme Court building three quarters submerged in the rising sea.
Today, Jonathan Thompson in his excellent Land Desk substack also takes up this case. Great complementary reading for Field Guide readers, from a dry lander's perspective.