More Justice – Obama Style! – Reason #72

Only 83 Days Remaining!

EPA Threatens Couple with $75,000 per day fine

President Obama has been very clear about “inheriting” problems from the Bush Administration and has been very vocal about undoing Bush policies with which he disagrees.  When it comes to the EPA however, it appears that the Obama Administration has in some cases, put their stamp of approval on existing EPA authority, regulations and policies, or – in other cases – doubled down to give it a life of its own.

In 2007, the EPA issued a “Compliance Order” to Chantell and Michael Sackett.  This became one of the cases which the Obama Administration decided to press.

Mr. and Mrs. Sackett reportedly purchased a residential lot in a residential subdivision, where other homes were being built.  They started grading the property, when suddenly they were confronted by the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers, advising them they were building on a “wetland” and with a “Compliance Order,” telling them they “…must stop all building…restore the land to its natural state…replace and plant trees…place a fence around the land and maintain the property in a pristine condition.”[i] “The Department of Justice, on behalf of the EPA, argues that under the law there is no right to challenge “compliance orders” until they are enforced.” [ii]

As the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on the case in January, 2012, Justice Samuel Alito, Jr. recapped the situation, noting that the Sackett “…lot was ‘found to have a little drainage problem,’”[iii] that they were told “you have wetlands.”  “You have to let us on your premises,” “You face $75,000 in penalties” each day, you cannot challenge this in court and that if a court case does become necessary, it will not occur “until we choose.”  Justice Alito reportedly observed that the scenario described by the EPA Attorney (U.S. Solicitor General Malcolm L. Stewart) was something that would be viewed by most American homeowners as “…something that ‘can’t happen in the United States.’” [iv]

But, as we now know, anything can happen in a country where the rules are being made and enforced by the Obama Administration.   Does this provide a little peek into the future with Agenda 21?

[i] Peter Bella, (Jan. 9, 2012), The Washington Times Communities web-site, Sackett v. EPA : Supreme Court will decide property rights case, retrieved January 11, 2012 from

[ii] Ibid

[iii] Lyle Denniston, (Jan. 9, 2012), SCOTUS Blog, A Weak Defense of EPA, retrieved January 11, 2012 from

[iv] Ibid