Idaho Lawmakers Want to 'Nullify' EPA So Dredge Mining Operations Can 'Get Back to Enjoying' State
Right-wing proponents of 鈥� the idea that individual states can free themselves from the purview of federal laws by virtue of simply declaring themselves so 鈥� have largely focused on convincing state
legislatures to pass bills 鈥渘ullifying鈥� federal gun laws, . Others applying such statutes to the fight over same-sex marriage.
Lawmakers in Idaho this week, though, expanded the field by applying 鈥渘耻濒濒颈蹿颈肠补迟颈辞苍鈥� to federal environmental laws.
The state鈥檚 House Resources Committee approved , a bill declaring that 鈥渢he regulation authority of the United States environmental protection agency is not authorized by the Constitution of the United States and violates its true meaning and intent 鈥� and is hereby declared to be invalid in the state of Idaho.鈥� The bill will next go to the floor of the House for a vote. (UPDATE: The bill and was sent back to the Resources Committee. This will likely kill the legislation for this year's session.)
Such nullification strategies are not particularly new; they have a long history on the extremist and racist right, with . Nonetheless, they have in recent years, often in desperation to prevent the passage of progressive measures.
The author of the Idaho bill, Rep. Paul Shepherd, hails from Riggins, a town where the economy is largely based on the mining industry. Much of his advocacy has focused on preventing the EPA from enforcing regulations on small-scale dredge-mining operations that have become popular among prospectors and wildcat miners. Much of his support has come .
鈥淟et鈥檚 get the EPA out of Idaho and get back to enjoying the Gem State,鈥� one of them told the lawmakers during testimony.
Shepherd鈥檚 agenda appears to go well beyond helping small dredge miners. During debate in the Resources Committee, Rep. Dell Raybould of Rexburg, a fellow Republican, : 鈥淚 notice in here, we鈥檙e talking about dredge mining, but the wording of this would this include any EPA regulations of anything in Idaho, just flat-out,鈥� he observed. He asked Shepherd if the bill would cover all EPA water quality and air quality standards.
鈥淵es,鈥� said Shepherd. 鈥淚 feel it covers any overreach that we can show is legally overreach by that agency.鈥�
Deputy Attorney General Brian Kane warned the committee, in a six-page analysis, that the bill 鈥渨ould, with almost certainty, be found unconstitutional.鈥� Committee members nonetheless approved it, despite Kane鈥檚 observation that the EPA鈥檚 constitutionality had been upheld numerous times by the Supreme Court.
Shepherd鈥檚 retort: 鈥淚 think that the Supreme Court needs to go by their oath of office. The Supreme Court鈥檚 changing the Constitution.鈥�
These arguments, of course, not only fly in the face of the Constitution itself , but also in the face of numerous court precedents. has a complete rundown of the legal and constitutional issues involved in the debate, as it were.
Anti-government rhetoric during the debate over dredge mining has predictably become heated. One mining district leader described the EPA as 鈥渏ack-booted thugs in swat uniforms鈥� to the . The same article noted that EPA officials in Idaho had so far not handed out any tickets or fines related to miners鈥� failures to obtain permits, in hopes of generating voluntary compliance with a new permit regime.
The state鈥檚 oldest environmental organization, the Idaho Conservation League, has long supported the permit process. They argue that dredge mining can 鈥渨reak havoc on fish habitat and stream water quality.鈥�
