Tom's Turn: Notes from our Senior Editor

Beyond the federal courts

December 15, 2002

You have heard a great deal of well-informed moaning from us and others about what Congress and the administration will try to do to our favorite environmental laws and about the extremists they will try to confirm as federal judges. All true. All worrisome. But the federal courts are not the only places to take grievances. They're terribly important and will remain so, but state courts have their own roles to play, as they always have.

Earthjustice has always had an active docket before state courts. They are the best venues to challenge many bad land-use decisions: zoning, urban sprawl, and so on. They are also often the best places to take problems with water rights. And in some states -- California, most prominently -- state laws are sometimes stronger than their federal counterparts.

In Florida, meanwhile, David Guest has turned to ancient common law and taken one case before a jury with two more to follow soon. The first involved an old legal theory known as "unlawful ejectment." In that case, a large landowner had tried to claim title to a waterway known as Fisheating Creek. Guest sued, arguing that the landowner had illegally evicted the people of Florida from the creek, which, under state law, belongs to the public. He managed to get the case in front of a jury in Glades County and won. (This is recounted in some detail in Justice on Earth.) Now, he has two new cases headed for jury trials. One involves a sawgrass marsh that is being damaged by excess runoff of water from tomato farms; the other has to do with sewage sludge that is applied to farm fields then washes into Horse Creek and winds up on downstream fields and in people's wells. Both suits seek injunctions to stop the harmful activities and money to pay for restoring the waterways.

We'll always be in federal court, but we'll be in other places as well. Whatever it takes.

Tom Turner, Senior Editor
yourturn@earthjustice.org