if this amendment is simply about codifying the Supreme Court's decision, why doesn't it say what the Supreme Court said? The Supreme Court said that agencies would be able to have discretion to consider cumulative impacts, traffic patterns, and other things in circumstances where those were very compelling factors. This amendment says, No, you can't consider any of that. Let's not kid ourselves. This is not codifying the Supreme Court's decision. This is taking it much, much further. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Jared Huffman: “if this amendment is simply about codifying the Supreme Court's decision, why doesn't it say what the Supreme Court…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing an amendment related to a Supreme Court decision on agency discretion.
Share
More from Jared Huffman
I am thinking a lot these days about the final unraveling of the Weimar Republic in the early 1930s.
We cannot mine our way to security with brute force because China controls 80 percent of the world's processing power and nearly 90 percent for rare earth elements. If our only solution is to just have more and more mines and to open up…
Mr. Chair, a lot of numbers have been thrown around on how NEPA takes so very, very long. Much of this is looking deep into the past and extrapolating from that. I want to correct the Record because, as of January 2025, $1 billion in the…
Mr. Speaker, we have been told time and again by our friends across the aisle that we have nothing to worry about here because this mine, even though it is proposed right next to the Boundary Waters wilderness on a river that flows…





