Monday: Watch Andy Johnson on Fox Business Network — and read about him in The Washington Times
In an astonishing display of arrogance and illegality, the EPA is threatening literally to destroy a small farmer in Wyoming for the “offense” of building an environmentally beneficial stock pond on his own land.
You can hear from the victim — PLF client Andy Johnson — on Monday morning (August 31), when he appears on Varney & Co, on Fox Business Network. The interview is scheduled for 10:10 a.m. EDT (7:10 a.m. PDT).
For additional background, Monday’s edition of The Washington Times features an extensive story on Andy’s plight — and PLF’s just-launched lawsuit on his behalf.
Andy constructed his pond only after the state of Wyoming reviewed and approved his plans. Beyond providing water for his livestock, the pond creates wetlands and wildlife habitat, and purifies the water that runs through it.
But the state’s sign-off, and the ecological benefits, apparently mean nothing to the bureaucrats at EPA. Because he didn’t ask for their permission to build it, they have ordered him to “dismantle” the pond — on pain of $37,500 per day in fines!
EPA regulators have targeted Andy and his family for financial ruin — with potential fines now totaling tens of millions of dollars — even though the Clean Water Act says his pond is none of their business; livestock ponds are explicitly exempted from EPA control.
After months of fruitlessly trying to talk sense to agency, Andy has now turned to the only forum where there’s hope for reason and the rule of law to prevail: the federal courts. Represented by PLF attorneys, he filed a lawsuit last week that asks the courts to enforce the Clean Water Act and tell EPA: Get off Andy’s land and out of his life!
Watch Andy on Monday on Fox Business Network — and read about him in The Washington Times — and you’ll surely agree that he’s a hero: He’s standing up for all of us against an agency whose contempt for the legal limits on its power endangers property owners, large and small, everywhere.
What to read next
PLF asks the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that there is no “legislative exception” to the unconstitutional conditions doctrine
It seems that some governments and courts prefer to treat Supreme Court precedent as an option, rather than a requirement. The Supreme Court has ruled—twice—that it’s unconstitutional for government to … ›