The court added 16 cases to its merits docket, including the WOTUS case, listed as Manufacturers v. Department of Defense. The case will determine whether the Clean Water Act grants jurisdiction to hear challenges under the WOTUS rule to courts of appeal or federal district courts. The new case before the court, however, is not expected to decide the merits of the WOTUS rule.

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), along with other industry stakeholders, welcomed the announcement. Such groups petitioned the decision in hope for a better chance of success at the district court level.

“The Supreme Court’s decision to hear our appeal is a victory for America’s cattle producers and all private property owners across the country,” said Scott Yager, environmental counsel for NCBA, in a statement. “It shows that the court has a continued interest in private property rights, and we look forward to oral arguments this spring.”

The WOTUS rule is an executive order applied under the Clean Water Act attempting to place smaller streams, tributaries and ponds under federal authority under two agencies.

It is uncertain what the outcome of the litigation will be, as the Trump administration shows indications of eliminating the rule. The case is expected to go before the justices sometime before the court’s June adjournment.

The Supreme Court currently has just eight members. In an interview last year with Progressive Cattleman, William G. Myers, an attorney with Holland & Hart LLP, said an eight-justice panel could ultimately be asked to decide the fate of WOTUS.

“It is obviously possible for the court to issue a unanimous or majority decision with just eight justices. If there were a tie vote of 4-to-4, then the lower court decision stands,” Myers said. “An eight-justice Supreme Court will decide any case that comes before it, one way or another.”

Numerous land and agricultural parties joined in an effort to defeat the jurisdictional WOTUS case, as well as legal briefs against the merits of the rule.

“The Supreme Court’s announcement is encouraging news for millions of landowners nationwide who have been uncertain where to file suits challenging federal regulations that define the scope of the Clean Water Act,” said Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) Principal Attorney M. Reed Hopper, who wrote PLF’s brief to the justices requesting they hear the case. “The Sixth Circuit read the Clean Water Act far too narrowly when it limited jurisdiction over WOTUS challenges to federal appellate courts. We expect the Supreme Court to overturn the Sixth Circuit decision.”