Jim Elbrecht wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote:

-snip-

In the majority opinion, Justice Scalia commented "Wet lands? The
plaintiffs in this case testified that they never once saw a boat or
vessel cross their property."


Did you hear that on the radio? Here's the opinion.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1062.pdf

I didn't read it, but there is no mention of a boat, which is good
because for a second there I thought Scalia had lost it.


Woe! My bad.

The statement was not part of the decision; Scalia's statement was part of
the oral arguments:

"Justice Antonin Scalia, speaking in the courtroom, mocked the EPA's view
that the Sacketts' small lot was protected by federal law as part of the
'navigable waters' of the United States. The couple, 'never having seen a
ship or other vessel cross their yard,' questioned that their lot was a
wetland, Scalia said, and they are entitled to a civil hearing before the
agency to contest the EPA's jurisdiction over their property. "

http://www.tulsaworld.com/site/print...rintComments=1

I apologize for the mistake and for sending you on a wild chicken chase.