Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/11pdf/10-1062.pdf
Page Number: 9.0

Cite as:  566 U. S. ____ (2012) 

7 

Opinion of the Court 

III 
Nothing  in  the  Clean  Water  Act  expressly  precludes
judicial  review  under  the  APA  or  otherwise.    But  in  de­
termining  “[w]hether  and  to  what  extent  a  particular
statute precludes judicial review,” we do not look “only [to]
its  express  language.”    Block  v.  Community  Nutrition 
Institute,  467  U. S.  340,  345  (1984).    The  APA,  we  have 
said,  creates  a  “presumption  favoring  judicial  review  of
administrative  action,”  but  as  with  most  presumptions, 
this  one  “may  be  overcome  by  inferences  of  intent  drawn
from  the  statutory  scheme  as  a  whole.”    Id.,  at  349.  The 
Government  offers  several  reasons  why  the  statutory
scheme of the Clean Water Act precludes review.

The  Government  first  points  to  33  U. S. C.  §1319(a)(3),
which provides that, when the EPA “finds that any person
is  in  violation”  of  certain  portions  of  the  Act,  the  agency
“shall  issue  an  order  requiring  such  person  to  comply
with  [the  Act],  or . . .  shall  bring  a  civil  action  [to  enforce 
the Act].”  The Government argues that, because Congress
gave the EPA the choice between a judicial proceeding and 
an  administrative  action,  it  would  undermine  the  Act  to 
allow  judicial  review  of  the  latter.  But  that  argument
rests  on  the  question-begging  premise  that  the  relevant 
difference between a compliance order and an enforcement 
proceeding  is  that  only  the  latter  is  subject  to  judicial
review.  There  are  eminently  sound  reasons  other  than 
insulation  from  judicial  review  why  compliance  orders 
are  useful.  The  Government  itself  suggests  that  they
“provid[e] a means of notifying recipients of potential vio­
lations  and  quickly  resolving  the  issues  through  volun- 
tary compliance.”  Brief for Respondents 39.  It is entirely 
consistent with this function to allow judicial review when
the recipient does not choose “voluntary compliance.”  The 
Act does not guarantee the EPA that issuing a compliance 
order will always be the most effective choice. 

The  Government  also  notes  that  compliance  orders  are