Guam v. United States
Guam v. United States | |
---|---|
Argued April 26, 2021 Decided May 24, 2021 | |
Full case name | Territory of Guam v. United States |
Docket no. | 20-382 |
Citations | 593 U.S. ___ (more) 141 S. Ct. 1608 209 L. Ed. 2d 691 |
Case history | |
Prior | |
Subsequent | Remanded for further proceedings, 852 F. App'x 14 (D.C. Cir. 2021) |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinion | |
Majority | Thomas, joined by unanimous |
Laws applied | |
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 |
Guam v. United States, 593 U.S. ___ (2021), was a
Background
In 2002, the EPA filed a complaint against Guam, stating that their management of the Ordot Dump violated the Clean Water Act, as waste contaminants from the dump were found to run off into the nearby Lonfit River and eventually into the Pacific Ocean. A consent decree was achieved in 2004, with Guam agreeing to pay a fine, close the site, and install a cover on the landfill.[2] A separate action initiated by the EPA in 2004 led to the site's forced closure in 2011,[3] and Guam agreeing to remediate affected areas around the landfill.[2] Total costs for completing these, along with other cleanup efforts ordered by the court, were estimated at $160 million.[1]
Guam filed a suit against the United States in 2017 under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA, or Superfund), asserting that since the Navy had been found as a potentially responsible party contributing to the site, the U.S. bears some of the cleanup costs, as outlined in CERCLA Section 107(a). The U.S. moved to close the suit, stating that under the clauses of CERCLA, there was a three-year statute of limitations for filing such complaints under CERCLA Section 113(f)(3)(B), which started with the consent agreement in 2004, and thus Guam had missed its window.[1]
The case was first heard in the
Supreme Court
Guam petitioned their case to the Supreme Court, asking them to resolve the question of whether Section 113(f)(3)(B)'s three-year statute applied to the consent agreement they had made with the EPA. The Court granted certiorari to the case in January 2021,[6] with oral arguments heard on April 26, 2021.[7]
The Court issued its decision on May 24, 2021, reversing the D.C. Circuit Court's ruling and remanding the case for further review. In the unanimous opinion, the court ruled that Section 113(f)(3)(B) did not apply to the consent agreement that Guam had made with the EPA, and thus the three-year statute of limitations from Section 113(f)(3)(B) did not apply; as such, Guam had the ability to pursue action against the government as allotted by Section 107(a). Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the opinion, focusing on the statutory interpretation of CERCLA. Thomas stated that "To be sure, as the Government points out, remedial measures that a party takes under another environmental statute might resemble steps taken in a formal CERCLA 'response action'. But relying on that functional overlap to reinterpret the phrase 'resolved its liability … for some or all of a response action' to mean 'settled an environmental liability that might have been actionable under CERCLA’ would stretch the statute beyond Congress' actual language."[8]
The decision has a potential impact on a number of pending lawsuits filed by states and local entities against the U.S. government and large companies to try to seek some recovery for the costs for cleanup of Superfund sites, as these suits had followed similar patterns of interaction between Guam and the EPA.[1]
References
- ^ E&E News. Retrieved May 24, 2021.
- ^ Courthouse News. Retrieved May 24, 2021.
- ^ Delgado, Nick (August 31, 2011). "Ordot Dump closed for business". KUAM-TV. Retrieved May 24, 2021.
- ^ Guam v. United States, 341 F. Supp. 3d 74 (D.D.C. 2018).
- ^ Guam v. United States, 950 F.3d 104 (D.C. Cir. 2020).
- ^ Guam v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 976 (2021).
- Courthouse News. Retrieved May 24, 2021.
- ^ Percival, Robert (May 24, 2021). "Unanimous court revives Guam's Superfund claim against U.S. Navy". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved May 24, 2021.
External links
- Text of Guam v. United States, 593 U.S. ___ (2021) is available from: Justia Oyez (oral argument audio) Supreme Court (slip opinion)
(: