On May 27, 2025, the United States submitted an amicus brief in a case concerning the scope of citizen suits under the Clean Water Act (CWA). This action may indicate the administration’s doubts about the extent of such lawsuits. The case in question is Port of Tacoma v. Puget Soundkeeper Alliance, which raises whether private groups can sue in federal court to enforce state-issued permit terms that exceed federal statute requirements.
States manage certain aspects of the CWA through delegation from the federal government after receiving approval from the Environmental Protection Agency. In this instance, Washington State issued a permit under the CWA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program to port owners and operators. Petitioners argue that this permit included terms originating from state law rather than federal law, contending that federal authorities lack enforcement power over non-federal terms. They assert, supported by the United States as amicus curiae, that allowing private groups to enforce these terms would give them more authority than federal entities in court.
The Ninth Circuit ruled that the “plain language” of the Clean Water Act permits private groups to enforce any NPDES permit provision, including those based on state law. This interpretation contrasts with a Second Circuit decision stating that state-based conditions are not enforceable federally via citizen suits.
Respondents defend this decision and argue against using this case for resolving broader issues due to its multiple grounds. They suggest that even if petitioners win, it might not change the outcome. However, it’s unclear if alternative grounds were considered by the Ninth Circuit.
If vehicle issues are resolved, this case could help address circuit splits and explore citizen suits’ role within executive powers and standing boundaries. Justice Kennedy previously noted difficulties when private parties exercise executive powers, while Justice Scalia highlighted potential constitutional concerns with citizen enforcement under federal statutes.
Citizen suits allow individuals with legitimate injuries but legal barriers to seek redress or prevent future harm. However, many cases involve plaintiffs without significant injuries, leading to challenges like measuring damages and accountability for legal outcomes. Nominal damages often result in funds being allocated outside constitutional protocols.
The Supreme Court’s consideration of these issues remains uncertain but necessary for clarity on citizen suit provisions.