Supreme Court refuses to hear L.A.'s appeal to let it dump sludge | McClatchy Washington Bureau

×
Sign In
Sign In
    • Customer Service
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Contact Us
    • Newsletters
    • Subscriber Services

    • All White House
    • Russia
    • All Congress
    • Budget
    • All Justice
    • Supreme Court
    • DOJ
    • Criminal Justice
    • All Elections
    • Campaigns
    • Midterms
    • The Influencer Series
    • All Policy
    • National Security
    • Guantanamo
    • Environment
    • Climate
    • Energy
    • Water Rights
    • Guns
    • Poverty
    • Health Care
    • Immigration
    • Trade
    • Civil Rights
    • Agriculture
    • Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • All Nation & World
    • National
    • Regional
    • The East
    • The West
    • The Midwest
    • The South
    • World
    • Diplomacy
    • Latin America
    • Investigations
  • Podcasts
    • All Opinion
    • Political Cartoons

  • Our Newsrooms

You have viewed all your free articles this month

Subscribe

Or subscribe with your Google account and let Google manage your subscription.

National

Supreme Court refuses to hear L.A.'s appeal to let it dump sludge

Michael Doyle - McClatchy Newspapers

June 01, 2010 07:27 PM

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday made it easier for San Joaquin Valley residents to reject Southern California sludge.

In a quiet but closely watched decision, the court declined to review a constitutional challenge to Kern County's ban on the land application of treated waste. The decision undermines Los Angeles' ability to challenge similar bans in the future.

Steven L. Mayer, a San Francisco-based attorney representing Kern County, said Tuesday that the decision will effectively restrict challenges to other anti-sludge policies that contain "similar circumstances" to Kern County's.

"It will be very fact specific," Mayer noted.

As is customary, the court did not explain its decision not to hear the challenge to the Kern County ban. The federal court's decision also does not affect remaining challenges being heard in state court.

Behind the scenes, though, cities and counties from across the country had stressed the significance of the sludge case. Chicago, Denver and Milwaukee officials, among others, had all warned the Supreme Court against proliferating local anti-sludge ordinances.

"They serve only a parochial goal to keep bulk biosolids intended for farm use from coming into the jurisdiction," an amicus brief filed by the cities stated.

Several San Joaquin Valley counties have debated or enacted ordinances in recent years governing sludge disposal. In 2006, Kern County voters by an overwhelming margin adopted Measure E. The strict ordinance made it unlawful to apply biosolids, meaning treated human and industrial waste, to unincorporated county land.

Though the ban applied to "any person," its practical effect targeted Southern California. The city of Los Angeles, as well as several Southern California sanitation districts, ship large amounts of waste to be spread on three Kern County farms.

Together, Honey Bucket Ranch, Tule Ranch and Green Acre Farms span more than 8,000 acres. The farmers use sludge as fertilizer, boosting crops like barley and wheat.

"Stop L.A. from dumping on Kern," one Measure E campaign brochure stated.

Los Angeles challenged the ban on several grounds. In part, city officials said Kern County was violating the so-called "dormant Commerce Clause" of the Constitution.

The dormant Commerce Clause essentially prohibits states from discriminating against one another in interstate commerce. Los Angeles officials also said Kern County's sludge ban would force the Southern California city to find other, more expensive places to ship its sludge.

A trial judge agreed with Los Angeles, and Measure E has never taken effect.

But in September, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Los Angeles couldn't rely on the dormant Commerce Clause because the constitutional provision dealt with commerce between different states rather than commerce within a single state.

"The interest the recyclers wish to ensure is their ability to exploit a portion of the intrastate waste market," the appellate court noted. "They want to be able to ship their waste from one part of California to another."

Mayer said he wasn't surprised the Supreme Court declined to hear the challenge, noting that the court "turns down the overwhelming majority of claims" that are submitted. Last year, the court considered 8,966 petitions and agreed to hear less than 90.

Read Next

Congress

’I’m not a softy by any means,’ Clyburn says as he prepares to help lead Democrats

By Emma Dumain

December 28, 2018 09:29 AM

Rep. Jim Clyburn is out to not only lead Democrats as majority whip, but to prove himself amidst rumblings that he didn’t do enough the last time he had the job.

KEEP READING

MORE NATIONAL

Elections

California Republicans fear even bigger trouble ahead for their wounded party

December 27, 2018 09:37 AM

Congress

‘Remember the Alamo’: Meadows steels conservatives, Trump for border wall fight

December 22, 2018 12:34 PM

National Security

Israel confounded, confused by Syria withdrawal, Mattis resignation

December 21, 2018 04:51 PM

Guantanamo

Did Pentagon ban on Guantánamo art create a market for it? See who owns prison art.

December 21, 2018 10:24 AM

Congress

House backs spending bill with $5.7 billion in wall funding, shutdown inches closer

December 20, 2018 11:29 AM

White House

Trump administration wants huge limits on food stamps — even though Congress said ‘no’

December 20, 2018 05:00 AM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

McClatchy Washington Bureau App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Newsletters
Learn More
  • Customer Service
  • Securely Share News Tips
  • Contact Us
Advertising
  • Advertise With Us
Copyright
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service