Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued the following two decisions:
Guam v. United States, No. 20-382: The Territory of Guam and the United States have been involved in a long-running dispute over clean-up-related costs regarding the Ordot Dump, which was first constructed and used by the Navy, and later ceded to Guam which used the dump as a public landfill. The Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) later brought suit against Guam related to the dump under the Clean Water Act, which resulted in a 2004 consent decree under which Guam paid a civil penalty and agreed to close and cover the dump. Over a decade later, Guam sued the United States under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”), for claims of cost-recovery under §107(a) and for contribution under §113(f). The D.C. Circuit found that Guam had possessed a CERCLA contribution claim based on the 2004 consent decree, but that the claim was time-barred. Moreover, the D.C. Circuit held that a party eligible to pursue contribution under §113(f) cannot assert a cost-recovery claim under §107(a), and thus found that Guam had no available remedy. Guam, in an effort to resuscitate its §107(a) claim, reversed course and contended that it never possessed a CERCLA contribution claim, because a claim under §113(f) must seek contribution related to a CERCLA-specific liability, rather than one under a broader array of settlements involving environmental liability. Today, the Court reversed, agreeing with Guam and holding that CERCLA contribution requires resolution of a CERCLA-specific liability. Justice Thomas issued the Court’s unanimous opinion.
View the Court's decision.
View the Court's decision.