This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The Clean Water Act (CWA) prohibits 'the discharge of any pollutant by any person,' without a permit, into the 'navigable waters.' The Act directs the Agency either to issue a compliance order or to initiate a civil enforcement action. The Sacketts (P) own a 2/3-acre residential lot in Bonner County, Idaho. Their property lies just north of Priest Lake but is separated from the lake by several lots containing permanent structures. P filled in part of their lot with dirt and rock. Some months later, they received from the EPA (D) a compliance order. Ps were now in violation of the CWA because they did not get a permit to fill in their land. P was ordered immediately to undertake activities to restore the Site, in accordance with a D-created Restoration Work Plan and to provide and/or obtain access to the Site and access to all records and documentation related to the conditions at the Site to D employees and/or their designated representatives. The statute calls for fines of $37,500 per day. P asked for a hearing, but that request was denied. P brought this action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. P brought suit under Chapter 7 of the APA, which provides for judicial review of 'final agency action for which there is no other adequate remedy in a court.' The District Court dismissed the claims for want of subject-matter jurisdiction, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed. It concluded that the Act 'precludes pre-enforcement judicial review of compliance orders.' If D took an action against P, then P would be able to state its claim before a court. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.