Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/17-1498_8mjp.pdf
Page Number: 46

Cite as:  590 U. S. ____ (2020) 

11 

Opinion of GORSUCH, J. 

sought  to  add  to,  not  detract  from,  state  law  remedial  ef-
forts.  It endorsed a federalized, not a centralized, approach
to  environmental  protection.  What  if  private  or  state
cleanup efforts really do somehow interfere with federal in-
terests?  Congress  didn’t  neglect  the  possibility.  But  in-
stead of requiring state officials and local landowners to beg 
Washington  for  permission,  Congress  authorized  the  fed-
eral  government  to  seek  injunctive  relief  in  court.  See 
§9606(a).  Atlantic Richfield would have us turn this system
upside down, recasting the statute’s presumption in favor
of  cooperative  federalism  into  a  presumption  of  federal 
absolutism. 

While I agree with the Court’s assessment in Parts I and
II of its opinion that we have jurisdiction to hear this case, 
I cannot agree with its ruling on the merits in Part III.  De-
parting  from  CERCLA’s  terms  in  this  way  transforms  it
from a law that supplements state environmental restora-
tion efforts into one that prohibits them.  Along the way, it
strips away ancient common law rights from innocent land-
owners and forces them to suffer toxic waste in their back-
yards,  playgrounds,  and  farms.  Respectfully,  that  is  not 
what the law was written to do; that is what it was written 
to prevent.