Up the Creek Without a Paddle: The U.S. Supreme Court Decides Little in Deciding Rapanos and Carabell

Abstract

LOOKING FOR THE CASE OF THE YEAR Each term of the U.S. Supreme Court, land use and environmental planners, public officials, and lawyers latch onto the “big” case and have fun with itintellectual Wiffle Ball if you willnot too serious, not too competitive, some-thing to play in the backyard on warm, summer nights. A year ago it was the magnificent Kelo v. New London [125 S. Ct. 2655 (2005)], the eminent domain dust-up that did not change the law, but did fracture the Court and stir the political pot at all levels of government. You had to love the colorful debate between the bare majority and the dissenters; for example, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's soquotable quote from her dissent: “Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory.”