Middlesex County Sewerage Auth. v. National Sea Clammers Assn.
453 U.S. 1 (1981)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The comprehensive and elaborate remedial schemes provided by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) and the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA) demonstrate congressional intent to preclude implied private rights of action for damages and to supplant remedies that might otherwise be available under federal common law or 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Facts:
- Various governmental entities from New York and New Jersey discharged sewage, sewage 'sludge,' and other waste materials into New York Harbor and the Hudson River.
- These materials were also dumped directly into the Atlantic Ocean from maritime vessels.
- In 1976, a massive growth of algae appeared in the Atlantic Ocean off the coasts of New York and New Jersey as a result of the pollution.
- The decomposition of the algae bloom created a condition of anoxia, or oxygen deficiency, in the water near the ocean floor.
- This condition caused the death of enormous amounts of marine life, including shellfish and other bottom-dwellers.
- The National Sea Clammers Association, an organization whose members harvest fish and shellfish in these waters, alleged that this pollution caused the collapse of their industries and resulted in significant economic harm.
Procedural Posture:
- The National Sea Clammers Association and an individual member sued various governmental entities in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, seeking damages and injunctive relief.
- The District Court granted summary judgment for the defendants (petitioners), holding that private parties could not bring a federal common law nuisance claim and that the FWPCA and MPRSA did not provide a private right of action for damages.
- The plaintiffs (respondents) appealed the dismissal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
- The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the FWPCA and MPRSA created an implied private right of action for damages and that the plaintiffs could pursue a claim under the federal common law of nuisance.
- The defendants (petitioners) successfully petitioned the United States Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Do the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) and the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA) create an implied private right of action for damages, independent of the citizen-suit provisions expressly provided in the statutes?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Powell
No. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act and the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 do not create an implied private right of action for damages. The key inquiry is congressional intent, and the elaborate and comprehensive enforcement schemes provided in these statutes indicate that Congress provided precisely the remedies it considered appropriate. When a statute expressly provides particular remedies, such as the citizen-suit provisions for injunctive relief in these Acts, courts must be 'chary of reading others into it.' The 'saving clauses' in the statutes do not preserve a right of action under the Acts themselves, but rather preserve rights under other statutes or common law. Furthermore, the comprehensiveness of the statutory remedies also demonstrates Congress's intent to foreclose suits under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Finally, based on the recent holding in Milwaukee v. Illinois, the federal common law of nuisance for water pollution has been entirely preempted by these comprehensive statutes.
Concurring-in-part-and-dissenting-in-part - Justice Stevens
Yes, but only as to the conclusion that the statutes do not implicitly authorize a private damages remedy. The majority reaches the right result on the implied right of action issue, but its reasoning regarding the preclusion of other remedies is palpably wrong. The FWPCA and MPRSA do not create an implied private right of action because they were enacted for the benefit of the general public, not a special class of plaintiffs. However, the Court errs in concluding that Congress intended to withdraw the express remedy available under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and preempt federal common law. The statutes contain explicit 'saving clauses' preserving rights under 'any statute,' which unambiguously includes § 1983. The Court's holding that Congress, by enacting major anti-pollution legislation, deliberately deprived injured parties of effective federal remedies they would otherwise have had is improbable and contrary to the statutes' plain language and legislative history.
Analysis:
This decision significantly curtails remedies for environmental harm under federal law by solidifying a restrictive approach to implying private rights of action from comprehensive statutes. It establishes that when Congress creates an elaborate enforcement scheme, that scheme is presumed to be exclusive, thereby precluding not only implied remedies under the statute itself but also remedies under more general laws like 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case also expands the doctrine of federal legislative preemption, confirming that comprehensive federal statutes can completely displace the federal common law in a given field. The practical effect is to channel most private environmental enforcement into the specific citizen-suit provisions of the relevant statutes, which often limit plaintiffs to seeking prospective injunctive relief and require strict adherence to procedural prerequisites like notice requirements.
Unlock the full brief for Middlesex County Sewerage Auth. v. National Sea Clammers Assn.