Rapanos v. United States:: Evaluating the efficacy of textualism in interpreting environmental laws

Rapanos v. United States is the third in a series of important cases addressing the extent to which the US. Army Corps of Engineers may regulate wetland areas under the Clean Water Act. Although no opinion commanded a majority of the Court, the decision revealed deep divisions among the justices regarding approaches to statutory interpretation. Justice Scalia's text-based approach contrasts sharply with the more traditional techniques applied by Justices Kennedy and Stevens. Justice Scalia's application of textualism, however, serves to constrain the Clean Water Act in a manner that undermines its purpose. The Rapanos decision, therefore, exemplifies the way in which comprehensive environmental laws are particularly susceptible to hamstringing if subjected to a purely textualist interpretive approach.