Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook Cty. v. Army Corps of Engineers | Wikipedia audio article
Channel: wikipedia tts
Date: 2019-07-07

This is an audio version of the Wikipedia Article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_Waste_Agency_of_Northern_Cook_County_v._Army_Corps_of_Engineers


00:01:46 1 Background
00:07:14 2 Decision
00:09:42 2.1 Dissent
00:10:34 3 Impact
00:12:14 3.1 Legal implications
00:19:41 3.2 Policy implications
00:26:06 3.3 State authority
00:30:22 4 iRapanos/i
00:31:02 5 See also



Listening is a more natural way of learning, when compared to reading. Written language only began at around 3200 BC, but spoken language has existed long ago.

Learning by listening is a great way to:
- increases imagination and understanding
- improves your listening skills
- improves your own spoken accent
- learn while on the move
- reduce eye strain

Now learn the vast amount of general knowledge available on Wikipedia through audio (audio article). You could even learn subconsciously by playing the audio while you are sleeping! If you are planning to listen a lot, you could try using a bone conduction headphone, or a standard speaker instead of an earphone.

Listen on Google Assistant through Extra Audio:
https://assistant.google.com/services/invoke/uid/0000001a130b3f91
Other Wikipedia audio articles at:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=wikipedia+tts
Upload your own Wikipedia articles through:
https://github.com/nodef/wikipedia-tts
Speaking Rate: 0.9177282708384893
Voice name: en-AU-Wavenet-A


"I cannot teach anybody anything, I can only make them think."
- Socrates


SUMMARY
=======
Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 531 U.S. 159 (2001), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States interpreting a provision of the Clean Water Act. Section 404, 33 U.S.C. § 1344, requires permits for the discharge of dredged or fill materials into "navigable waters," which is defined by the Act as "waters of the United States." That provision was the basis for the federal wetlands permitting program.
The Court held that the Corps of Engineers' use of the long-controversial "migratory bird rule," adopted by the Corps and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to interpret the reach of their section 404 authority over discharges into "isolated waters" (including isolated wetlands), exceeded the authority granted by that section.
Long before the SWANCC case, there had been controversy and litigation over whether isolated waters that are not adjacent to true navigable waters are properly within the jurisdiction of section 404. In 1985, the Supreme Court sustained the assertion by the Corps and EPA that waters and wetlands adjacent to navigable waters, interstate waters, or their tributaries are "waters of the United States" under section 404. The question left for SWANCC was whether waters and wetlands not so adjacent, "isolated waters", also are so covered.