Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-454_4g15.pdf
Page Number: 69.0

2 

SACKETT v. EPA 

KAVANAUGH, J., concurring in judgment 

property are not covered by the Act and are therefore not 
subject to permitting requirements. 

I  write  separately  because  I  respectfully  disagree  with
the  Court’s  new  test  for  assessing  when  wetlands  are 
covered by the Clean Water Act.  The Court concludes that 
wetlands  are  covered  by  the  Act  only  when  the  wetlands 
have  a  “continuous  surface  connection”  to  waters  of  the 
United States—that is, when the wetlands are “adjoining” 
covered waters.  Ante, at 20, 22 (internal quotation marks
In  my  view,  the  Court’s  “continuous  surface 
omitted). 
connection”  test  departs  from  the  statutory  text,  from  45
years  of  consistent  agency  practice,  and  from  this  Court’s 
precedents.  The Court’s test narrows the Clean Water Act’s 
coverage  of  “adjacent”  wetlands  to  mean  only  “adjoining” 
wetlands.  But  “adjacent”  and  “adjoining”  have  distinct 
meanings:  Adjoining  wetlands  are  contiguous  to  or 
bordering  a  covered  water,  whereas  adjacent  wetlands 
include both (i) those wetlands contiguous to or bordering a
covered water, and (ii) wetlands separated from a covered
water  only  by  a  man-made  dike  or  barrier,  natural  river 
berm,  beach  dune,  or  the  like.  By  narrowing  the  Act’s 
coverage of wetlands to only adjoining wetlands, the Court’s
new test will leave some long-regulated adjacent wetlands
no longer covered by the Clean Water Act, with significant
flood  control 
for  water  quality  and 
repercussions 
throughout  the  United  States.  Therefore,  I  respectfully 
concur only in the Court’s judgment. 

I 

The  Clean  Water  Act  generally  prohibits  dumping  a 
“pollutant”—including  dredged  or 
fill  material—into 
“navigable waters” without a permit.  33 U. S. C. §§1311(a), 
1344(a), 1362.  The Act defines “navigable waters” as “the
waters of the United States, including the territorial seas.”
§1362(7).

As the Court today ultimately agrees, see ante, at 19, and