Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-454_4g15.pdf
Page Number: 59.0

Cite as:  598 U. S. ____ (2023) 

25 

THOMAS, J., concurring 

the CWA).  Finally, even assuming that a navigable water 
is involved, the agencies have not established that the Sack-
etts’ actions would obstruct or otherwise impede navigable 
capacity or the suitability of the water for interstate com-
merce.  See Rio Grande Dam & Irrigation Co., 174 U. S., at 
709. 

This is not to say that determining whether a water qual-
ifies under the CWA is always easy.  But, it is vital that we 
ask the right question in determining what constitutes “the
waters of the United States”: whether the water is within 
Congress’ traditional authority over the interstate channels 
of  commerce.  Here,  no  elaborate  analysis  is  required  to 
know  that  the  Sacketts’  land  is  not  a  water,  much  less  a 
water of the United States. 

IV 
What happened to the CWA is indicative of deeper prob-
lems  with  the  Court’s  Commerce  Clause  jurisprudence.
The  eclipse  of  Congress’  well-defined  authority  over  the 
channels of interstate commerce tracks the Court’s expan-
sion of Congress’ power “[t]o regulate Commerce with for-
eign Nations, and among the several States, and with the
Indian  Tribes.”  Art.  I,  §8,  cl. 3.    As  I  have  explained  at 
length,  the  Court’s  Commerce  Clause  jurisprudence  has
significantly  departed  from  the  original  meaning  of  the 
Constitution.  See  Gonzales  v.  Raich,  545  U. S.  1,  58–59 
(2005)  (dissenting  opinion);  Lopez,  514  U. S.,  at  586–602 
(concurring opinion).  “The Clause’s text, structure, and his-
tory all indicate that, at the time of the founding, the term
‘ “commerce” consisted of selling, buying, and bartering, as
well as transporting for these purposes.’ ”  Raich, 545 U. S., 
at 58.  This meaning “stood in contrast to productive activ-
ities like manufacturing and agriculture,” and founding era 
sources demonstrate that “the term ‘commerce’ [was] con-
sistently used to mean trade or exchange—not all economi-
cally gainful activity that has some attenuated connection