The Supreme Court and the Clean Water Act

a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.simpsoncrazy.com/content/pictures/onetimers/lisa-slurry.png"img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 500px; height: 376px;" src="http://www.simpsoncrazy.com/content/pictures/onetimers/lisa-slurry.png" alt="" border="0" //abr /br /While the Court's decision a href="http://lefarkins.blogspot.com/2009/06/section-5-of-voting-rights-act-narrowed.html"not to strike down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act /a-- at least, not yet -- was probably the best outcome that could have been expected, the same was certainly not true of a href="http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=06amp;year=2009amp;base_name=back_to_reality"another of the Court's decisions yesterday/a, which went along with a Bush administration decision allowing a company to dump large amounts of extremely toxic chemicals into a a lake on the grounds that the toxic slurry was "fill material" rather than a "pollutant," and hence a permit could be granted by the Army Corps of Engineers rather than the EPA.div class="blogger-post-footer"img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/7163938-4501890161542576366?l=lefarkins.blogspot.com'//div