Waters of the United States

Obama-era administration -- WOTUS Litigation

For comprehensive details on the “Waters of the United States” litigation under the Obama administration, please check out our dedicated Waters of the United States issue tracker. 

• Litigation challenging subject matter jurisdiction

In re Murray Energy Corporation v. EPA, et al. [Case closed]
Sixth Circuit, No. 15-3751

Petition for review (July 13, 2015) 

Order (October 9, 2015) the Sixth Circuit halted the enforcement of the 2015 Clean Water Rule nationwide. 

Order of dismissal (February 28, 2018) the Sixth Circuit Court vacated the nationwide order halting the enforcement of the 2015 Clean Water Rule and dismissed all petitioners’ challenges to the rule for lack of jurisdiction following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in National Association of Manufacturers v. Department of Defense, et al. 

State of Ohio, et al. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [Case closed] 
Sixth Circuit, No. 15-3799

Petition for review (July 24, 2015) 

Order of dismissal (February 28, 2018) the Sixth Circuit Court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction. 

National Association of Manufacturers v. Department of Defense, et al. [Case closed]
U.S. Supreme Court, No. 16-299

Opinion (January 22, 2018) the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that challenges to the regulatory definition of “waters of the United States” must be filed in federal district courts, not federal circuit courts of appeals. 

• Litigation challenging the WOTUS regulatory definition

In RE: Clean Water Rule: Definition of “Waters of the United States” [Case closed] 
U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (MDL), No. 2663

Motion for consolidation of pretrial proceedings (July 27, 2015) 

Order denying transfer (October 13, 2015) the Judicial Panel declined to consolidate pretrial proceedings in the multiple pending challenges to the 2015 Clean Water Rule. 

North Dakota, et al. v. U.S. EPA, et al. [Case open] 
USDC North Dakota, No. 3:15-cv-59

Complaint (June 29, 2015) 

Murray Energy Corporation v. U.S. EPA, et al. [Case closed] 
USDC N.D. West Virginia, No. 1:15-cv-110

Complaint (June 29, 2015) 

Memorandum opinion and order (August 26, 2015) 

State of Ohio, et al. v. U.S. EPA, et al. [Case closed] 
USDC S.D. Ohio, No. 2:15-cv-2467
Sixth Circuit, No. 19:35000; No. 22:3292

Complaint (June 29, 2015)

Opinion and order (March 23, 2022) the U.S. District Court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and granted the defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment. 

Order (September 18, 2023) the Sixth Circuit dismissed the appeal. 

State of Texas, et al. v. U.S. EPA, et al. [Case closed] 
USDC S.D. Texas, No. 3:15-cv-162

Complaint (June 29, 2015) 

Order (September 12, 2018) the U.S. District Court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining enforcement of the 2015 Clean Water Act in the states of Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. 

Order of dismissal (March 2, 2021) the U.S. District Court dismissed the case following the repeal of the 2015 Clean Water Rule. 

State of Georgia, et al. v. Wheeler, et al. [Case closed] 
USDC S.D. Georgia, No. 2:15-cv-79
Eleventh Circuit, No. 15-14035

Complaint (June 30, 2015) 

Order (June 8, 2018) the U.S. District Court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining enforcement of the 2015 Clean Water Rule in the states of Georgia, West Virginia, Alabama, Florida, Kansas, Kentucky, South Carolina, Utah, and Wisconsin. 

Order (August 21, 2019) the U.S. District Court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and remanded the rule to the agencies for further proceedings. The preliminary injunction remains in effect pending the outcome of the rule’s administrative proceedings. 

Judgment (January 7, 2020) 

American Farm Bureau Federation, et al. v. U.S. EPA, et al. [Case closed] 
USDC S.D. Texas, No. 3:15-cv-165

Complaint (July 2, 2015) 

Order (September 12, 2018) the U.S. District Court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining enforcement of the 2015 Clean Water Rule in the states of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi. 

Order of dismissal (March 2, 2021) 

State of Oklahoma v. U.S. EPA, et al. [Case closed] 
USDC N.D. Oklahoma, No. 4:15-cv-381
Tenth Circuit, No. 19-5055

Complaint (July 8, 2015)

Stipulation of voluntary dismissal (January 7, 2020) 

U.S. Chamber of Commerce, et al. v. U.S. EPA, et al. [Case closed] 
USDC N.D. Oklahoma, No. 4:15-cv-386
Tenth Circuit, No. 16-5038

Complaint (July 10, 2015) 

Order (December 26, 2018) the U.S. District Court consolidated this case with State of Oklahoma v. U.S. EPA, et al. 

Southeastern Legal Foundation, Inc. v. U.S. EPA, et al. [Case closed] 
USDC N.D. Georgia, No. 1:15-cv-2488

Complaint (July 13, 2015) 

Joint stipulation of voluntary dismissal without prejudice (October 20, 2022) 

Washington Cattlemen’s Association, et al. v. U.S. EPA [Case closed] 
USDC Minnesota, No. 0:15-cv-3058

Complaint (July 15, 2015)

Order (November 8, 2016) the U.S. District Court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject mater jurisdiction. 

Puget Soundkeeper Alliance, et al. v. McCarthy, et al. [Case closed] 
USDC W.D. Washington, No. 2:15-cv-1342
Ninth Circuit, No. 19-35074

Complaint (August 20, 2015) 

Order (November 26, 2018) the U.S. District Court partially granted and partially denied both parties’ motions for summary judgment. The court held that the appropriate remedy was the nationwide vacatur of the applicability date rule. 

Order (September 14, 2020) the U.S. District Court dismissed the case without prejudice.