President Biden’s Second Veto Is on Congress’ Disapproval of EPA’s Revised Definition of WOTUS
Time 3 Minute Read
President Biden’s Second Veto Is on Congress’ Disapproval of EPA’s Revised Definition of WOTUS
Categories: EPA, Policy, Water

President Biden issued his second veto late last week. The President’s second veto protects a U.S. EPA rule that went into effect on March 20, 2023. That rule redefines “waters of the United States” (WOTUS), and at a high conceptual level, returns the Agency’s interpretation of WOTUS to that of the Obama administration, an interpretation that was revoked and replaced by the Trump administration.

This matter has been hotly contested in the federal courts. Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court is poised to issue a ruling within the next several weeks on Sackett v. EPA, a decision which could substantially revise and narrow the Agency’s definition of “waters of the United States.” The Court’s decision here could send the Biden administration’s revised definition of WOTUS back to EPA for changes needed in-line with the Court’s decision, if and when issued.

Regardless, it is clear that environmental regulatory affairs and litigation have become matters of national importance. Indeed, Biden’s first and second vetoes turned on environmental matters. The President’s first veto disapproved of a Congressional joint resolution that attempted to nullify a U.S. Department of Labor regulation on the consideration of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) factors when investing in retirement accounts (which we wrote about here), and the President’s second veto focused on a different environmental matter: WOTUS.

On March 9, 2023, in the run-up to Biden’s second veto, the U.S. House of Representatives approved Joint Resolution 27. This joint resolution would have given EPA’s revised definition of WOTUS “no force or effect.” By a vote of 227-198, nine Democrats joined all House Republicans (except one) in support of the joint resolution. The U.S. Senate, in turn, approved the same Joint Resolution on March 29, 2023, by a vote of 53-43, with five Democrats joining all Senate Republicans (except one). Thus, the Joint Resolution was sent to Biden’s desk, where, as mentioned above, the President issued the second veto of his administration.

Now that President Biden has vetoed Congress’ joint resolution disapproving of EPA’s revised definition of WOTUS, Congress may attempt to override the President’s veto. However, overcoming the President’s veto requires a two-thirds majority in both chambers. With divided government—that is, the House and Senate having different political parties in the majority—that margin is unlikely. Therefore, EPA’s revised definition of WOTUS is likely to remain in effect until ongoing litigation concerning the matter or the Court’s decision in Sackett holds otherwise.

  • Partner

    Joe advocates for clients on key energy and environmental issues before Congress, the White House and federal agencies. Joe serves as head of the federal government relations team. His decades of experience provides him the ...

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 1 Minute Read

The “prior converted cropland” exclusion exempts certain agricultural lands from Clean Water Act regulation. The 2025 “waters of the United States” proposed rule seeks to clarify and update this exclusion, making it easier for farmers to demonstrate that their prior converted cropland is not subject to the Clean Water Act. If finalized, the proposal could have significant benefits for agricultural producers nationwide.

Time 5 Minute Read

Perhaps the biggest EPR news to date is the February 6, 2026 decision by the US District Court for the District of Oregon granting the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors Inc. (NAW) a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of Oregon’s Plastic Pollution and Recycling Modernization Act (RMA) pending a decision on the merits.[1] The Oregon litigation has the potential to affect the scope of EPR programs across the country, potentially extending beyond packaging to other products. In the meantime, product manufacturers and retailers must continue to wrestle with how best to manage EPR compliance and related costs and business impacts.

Time 9 Minute Read

On November 20, 2025, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of the Army issued a notice of a proposed rulemaking to update the definition of “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act for consistency with the US Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency and to clarify key terms for implementation.

Time 8 Minute Read

While the Trump Administration has emphasized regulatory reform and prioritized agency efficiency across the federal government, EPA continues to pursue aggressive enforcement of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Actions taken by EPA over the first six months of President Trump’s current term demonstrate sustained FIFRA enforcement, with notably high penalty amounts being assessed, including one case resulting in a $3 million penalty. These latest enforcement trends signal that pesticide manufacturers, distributors, and sellers must remain vigilant in complying with FIFRA requirements.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page