Wisconsin Supreme Court delivers win for environmentalists in fight over ‘forever chemicals'
The liberal-controlled court ruled that state regulators can force landowners to clean up emerging pollutants such as PFAS before they are officially designated as hazardous substances.
The 5-2 ruling is a defeat for the state's powerful group representing businesses and manufacturers, which had argued the state couldn't enforce regulations on substances before they were officially designated as hazardous.
It is the latest development in a yearslong battle in Wisconsin and nationally involving regulators, environmentalists, politicians and businesses over how to deal with PFAS contamination.
The PFAS problem
Cities large and small across Wisconsin, from Madison to Marinette and La Crosse to Wausau, are grappling with PFAS contamination. The U.S. Geological Survey has estimated that at least 45% of the nation's tap water is contaminated with PFAS.
PFAS, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a group of chemicals that have been around for decades and have now spread into the nation's air, water and soil.
They were manufactured by companies such as 3M, Chemours and others because they were incredibly useful. They helped eggs slide across nonstick frying pans, ensured that firefighting foam suffocates flames and helped clothes withstand the rain and keep people dry.
The chemicals resist breaking down, however, which means they stay around in the environment and have a hard time breaking down in the body. There is a wide range of health harms now associated with exposure to certain PFAS, including low birth weight, cancer and liver disease.
Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and Republican legislators have been at odds over how to address the problem for years, with both sides blaming the other for not earmarking more money for clean up efforts.
The Wisconsin case
The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled in a case brought by the state's largest business group, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, which sued the DNR in 2021 on behalf of Leather Rich, a dry cleaning business in Oconomowoc.
Leather Rich became aware of PFAS contamination in 2018 and was working on cleaning it up when the DNR posted a message online in 2019 saying it now considered PFAS chemicals a hazardous substance. The agency ordered the dry cleaner to test its groundwater for PFAS but didn't tell the business which compounds it needed to test for or what levels would be considered dangerous.
They argued the DNR can't force businesses to test and clean up contamination from emerging pollutants like PFAS without first designating them as hazardous substances. That process can take years and requires approval from the Legislature.
A Waukesha County judge and the state appeals court sided with Leather Rich.
The DNR appealed, arguing that it could unilaterally force testing because state law gives the agency broad authority to protect the environment. It also argued that the lower court's ruling would neuter the state's 'spills law,' which was designed to confront pollution.
That law, enacted about 50 years ago, requires anyone who causes, possesses or controls a hazardous substance that's been released into the environment to clean it up.
Fight over PFAS regulation
Since the lawsuit was filed, additional state and federal regulations of PFAS have been put in place.
Federal regulators placed the first-ever national standards on PFAS in drinking water last year, but the Trump administration said in May that it planned to weaken those limits.
The state has imposed less restrictive limits on PFAS in surface and drinking water, defined as piped water delivered through public systems and noncommunity systems that serve places such as factories, schools and hotels.
But it has not implemented PFAS standards for groundwater, the source of drinking water for about two-thirds of Wisconsin residents. The agency stopped efforts to draft them in 2023 after determining that compliance would be too expensive.
Scott Bauer And Todd Richmond, The Associated Press
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
44 minutes ago
Massachusetts advocates fear Trump's bill will unravel health safety net in Obamacare's model state
BOSTON -- In the state that served as the model for Obamacare, advocates and health care workers fear the Trump administration is trying to dismantle piece-by-piece a popular program that has provided insurance, preventive care and life-saving medication to hundreds of thousands of people. Provisions contained in both the Senate and House versions of the massive tax and spending cuts bill advancing in Congress — a centerpiece of President Donald Trump's agenda — could strip health insurance from up to a quarter of the roughly 400,000 people enrolled in the Massachusetts Health Connector, according to state estimates. The changes would create anew the coverage gaps state leaders were working to close when Massachusetts in 2006 became the first U.S. state to enact a law requiring nearly every resident to have health insurance, state officials say. Beyond the effect on residents' health, losing care could have broader repercussions — both for the program's finances and residents' ability to make a living. 'The idea of needing to unwind that now and pull back on that promise and commitment is really frustrating and heartbreaking and cruel and counterproductive,' said Audrey Morse Gasteier, executive director of Massachusetts' health insurance marketplace. Trump and Republican supporters in Congress say the changes, which include new documentation requirements and limitations on who can apply for tax credits to help pay for insurance, are necessary to root out what they call fraud, waste and abuse. The Affordable Care Act changes proposed in both versions of the bill, along with massive cuts to Medicaid and other programs, would eliminate roughly $1.1 trillion in health care spending over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. In Lawrence, a mill community of around 90,000 people on the Merrimack River, where more than 80% of the population is Hispanic or Latino, Kesia Moreta said she's already seeing people slip out of the state's health care network because of the Trump administration's aggressive effort to crack down on illegal immigration. Moreta, who manages a program created under the ACA that helps people sign up for coverage, said clients have been missing meetings out of fear that being enrolled for health insurance will harm their effort to stay in the U.S. legally. Recently, a father of a U.S.-born teenage son with epilepsy deleted every email related to his health plan and stopped answering calls from the Connector after watching reports about deportations on social media. When his son's medication ran out, Moreta said the father finally reached out, whispering over the phone, 'Is this going to get me deported?' 'That breaks our hearts,' Moreta said. More than 98% of Massachusetts residents have health insurance, the lowest rate of uninsurance in the country, according to the Massachusetts Health Insurance Survey. Vicky Pulos, an attorney for the Mass Law Reform Institute who helps low-income people gain access to health care, said Republicans who tried and failed to repeal the Affordable Care Act during the first Trump administration have decided to take it apart incrementally despite its growing popularity. 'It really seems like this is just a less transparent way of effectively dismantling the accomplishments of the Affordable Care Act in both Medicaid and the marketplace,' Pulos said. The changes, she added, 'will massively drive up the number of uninsured but without openly repealing the ACA.' Another provision included in both the House and Senate bills would require people applying for or renewing coverage to provide more documentation of their income, household size and immigration status to be eligible for premium tax credits when the state marketplace already has that information, which Morse Gasteier said would cause 'friction, red tape and delays.' The Trump administration has said the proposals will 'put a stop' to immigrants 'stealing taxpayer-funded health care benefits meant for American citizens.' No states use federal money to provide health insurance to people who are in the U.S. illegally. Some, like Massachusetts, use state tax dollars to do so to provide basic primary care services for a small population of vulnerable residents, like children. No undocumented immigrants receive insurance through the state marketplace. Of the 400,000 enrolled in the state marketplace, around 60,000 are noncitizens who are in the U.S. legally and would lose access to federal premium tax credits if either chamber's version of the bill becomes law. The number includes domestic violence and human trafficking victims, refugees, people granted asylum or humanitarian parole, temporary protected status and other work-authorized immigrants. Without the credits, premiums will cost upwards of $500 or $600 — an increase many people can't afford, Morse Gasteier said. Around half are green-card holders with an annual income of $15,000 a year or less. The remaining 40,000 people expected to lose coverage are U.S. citizens Morse Gasteier said could be stymied in applying or recertifying coverage by provisions like the increased documentation requirements. Morse Gasteier said Massachusetts' marketplace worked 'tirelessly' to enroll vulnerable and hard-to-reach populations after the state program — formed under the leadership of then-Gov. Mitt Romney and known as 'Romneycare" — was created. She worries that if people hear help is no longer available, 'entire populations will just sort of give up on health insurance.' In addition to affecting residents' health, that could have an economic impact in the state. Immigrants with legal status enrolled in the state marketplace tend to be younger than the rest of the population, Morse Gasteier said. Their presence brings premiums down for others because they tend to be healthier. In Lawrence, advocates who help people obtain insurance coverage though the ACA marketplace say the burden would fall disproportionately on people with chronic health issues like diabetes and chronic heart disease. The Greater Lawrence Community Action Council assists around 10,000 people a year with either signing up for or renewing health insurance. 'If you're not healthy, let me tell you, you can't work. If you can't work, you can't pay your bills. It's just as simple as that,' said GLCAC CEO Vilma Martinez-Dominguez. Moreta said one man who called her from the emergency room recently said he discovered his health insurance had lapsed. Moreta said she could help him renew it, and urged him to wait at the hospital. He told her not to do anything. He was leaving the hospital. She has no idea what became of him.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump's Big Beautiful Bill Update: Watch Live as House Votes
House Republican leaders appear to have made a breakthrough in securing enough votes to pass President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act before the self-imposed July 4 deadline. Speaker Mike Johnson announced that he had secured the necessary votes to advance the legislation, signaling that final passage would likely follow later in the morning. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) is surrounded by security and staff as he heads to the House Chamber for a procedural vote on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in the U.S. Capitol... Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) is surrounded by security and staff as he heads to the House Chamber for a procedural vote on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in the U.S. Capitol on July 02, 2025 in Washington, DC. More Getty The breakthrough comes after House Republicans were locked in stalemate for hours after nearly a dozen holdouts refused to support what would be Trump's first major legislative victory of his second term. A rule vote on the megabill is due to take place at 3:30 a.m ET. With an hour of debate on the bill itself, the final vote on the bill will likely take place two or three hours after that between 5:30-6:30 a.m. Follow Newsweek's live blog for updates.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Final megabill votes are secured, GOP leaders say
Mike Johnson is staring down the legislative challenge of his career. As soon as this morning, the speaker will attempt to ram the Senate-passed megabill through the House as dozens of Republicans threaten to vote it down. The detractors come from across the Republican conference after the Senate sent over a bill with deeper Medicaid cuts, steeper deficit hikes and less onerous clean-energy provisions than expected. And he's gunning to deliver by President Donald Trump's self-imposed July 4 deadline, as severe thunderstorms in Washington threaten full attendance. 'We'll see. I've got to play the cards that are dealt to me,' Johnson said Tuesday, after admitting he was 'not happy' with the Senate's changes to the bill. 'And we're working through that. … But we remain optimistic we're going to land it at this point.' Johnson has 24 to 48 hours to persuade reluctant fiscal hawks and Medicaid moderates to swallow the Senate's bill. He spent Monday on calls with concerned lawmakers and caucuses, scrambling to figure out how to pass it this week without making changes to the bill. (John Thune and Johnson have been in contact through much of the process but did not speak in the hours leading up to the Senate vote, the majority leader told POLITICO.) But the Senate bill will be tough to sell. House Freedom Caucus members like Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) blasted the Senate's bill Tuesday for adding to the deficit and softening clean energy tax credits. Roy and Norman both voted against the bill in the Rules Committee overnight. House moderates are worried about the steep cuts to Medicaid, which Johnson has privately said could cost Republicans the House in 2026. Sen. Thom Tillis' (R-N.C.) speech torching the Senate's Medicaid provisions for similar reasons shook many vulnerable Republicans. And a substantial cross section of the two groups of holdouts would rather take time to rework the package and send it back to the Senate, instead of jamming the Senate version through the House under a self-imposed deadline. Norman said the House should go back to the original bill, leave town and come back when Senate Republicans are 'serious.' Some signs of progress for Johnson: Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) appeared more likely to support the bill Tuesday night after previously refusing a deal on a state and local tax deduction. Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.), previously a strong no on the bill over the Medicaid provider tax, told POLITICO a local provider tax tweak in the wraparound amendment for New Jersey and other states has him feeling better about the bill. But it would still be a gamble for Johnson to put it on the House floor: Many Republicans think the bill would fail without additional changes. However, the speaker has previously succeeded in putting bills on the floor without the votes — and relying on Trump to pressure holdouts to fold. What else we're watching: — Weather problems could delay House vote: Over 200 flights into Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport were either canceled or delayed Tuesday amid thunderstorms in Washington, according to the flight-tracking service FlightAware. Johnson said Tuesday night that the travel issues could push back the House vote on the GOP megabill, which is expected as early as Wednesday. — More reconciliation packages: As the House looks to pass the current reconciliation package without further tweaks, Johnson is suggesting there could be future opportunities for lawmakers to get their priorities into party-line packages. In an interview on Fox News on Tuesday night, Johnson said the House will plan to do two more reconciliation bills during this session of Congress, which ends in 2026. Jordain Carney, Meredith Lee Hill and Benjamin Guggenheim contributed to this report.
