I charted my own path on the WOTUS challenge, despite criticism. And I was right | Opinion

The Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rules proposed by the Biden administration are overreaching, extreme, and, if implemented in Idaho, harmful to our economy and freedoms. The Biden administration not only brought the Obama rule back — but expanded it. Now, nearly every droplet of water in the U.S. could be controlled and regulated by the federal government.

The Biden WOTUS rules would subject Idaho citizens to massive federal overreach on their own land and hamper Idaho job creators. They would create a barrier for Idaho’s farmers, ranchers, and small businesses that depend on access to their land and Idaho resources.

That is why my team and I worked hard to evaluate these new regulations for their legality and then pick the best strategy possible to shield Idaho from their harmful effects. The result has been an initial big legal win for the State of Idaho.

A federal court has ruled in our favor, granting both Idaho and Texas a preliminary injunction against implementing these rules in our states. We won this initial victory because I decided to join Texas in this legal effort rather than join a different lawsuit advocated by others.

Joining the other lawsuit would have been easier because it only required us to do minimal work. But joining the Texas lawsuit required more strategic thinking and more legal work by our attorneys. As this victory demonstrates, my decision to join the Texas lawsuit was not only right but also made Idaho a leader in the fight for state sovereignty.

During my campaign, I promised to assemble the best legal team the Office of Attorney General had ever seen. I brought back the solicitor general role to Idaho and hired top litigators who are smart, aggressive and strategic. Our team brought meaningful contributions to this case, and because of the savvy legal minds handling this litigation, we got the correct result and the quickest relief for Idaho. Today, these terrible new regulations are in the process of being implemented in 48 other states, while Idaho and Texas have received a reprieve as our full lawsuit moves forward.

Various editorial boards, political pundits, members of the governor’s team and U.S. Congressman Mike Simpson publicly chastised me for joining the Texas lawsuit and accused me of not leading on this issue. They advocated that my team and I take a different course. They claimed that I was putting my interests ahead of the interests of Idaho. Ironically, the other lawsuit has yet to move forward. Who is leading now? And what have we heard from my many critics - silence.

I appreciate my naysayers expressing concern over these rules. In fact, it was a welcomed surprise to see some of Idaho’s most liberal newspapers advocating for state sovereignty. Our office’s strategic decisions in this case resulted in Idaho winning an initial victory against these rules. This action alone demonstrates why challenges against overreaching federal incursions and the legal strategy employed are best left in the purview of the Attorney General’s Office, where it belongs, rather than in the back-room discussions of government bureaucrats and the media.

As promised, my team and I will continue to be proactive in the Attorney General’s Office, defending Idaho’s sovereignty and our personal freedoms.

This story was originally published April 6, 2023 at 4:00 AM.