Editors' Summary: This Comment reviews the Supreme Court's reversal of the Sixth Circuit's decision in United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes, Inc., the controversial FWPCA wetlands jurisdiction case. The Court rejected the Sixth Circuit's argument that the jurisdiction must be narrowly construed in order to avoid potential takings of private property. Relying on the water quality and ecological purposes of the FWPCA, the Court upheld Army Corps of Engineers' regulations that broadly interpret FWPCA upheld Army Corps of Engineers' reglations that broadly interpret FWPCA jurisdiction over wetlands. The opinion falls in line with earlier opinions of the Burger Court rejecting the Takings Clause as a substantive limit on governmental powers and deferring to expert agency interpretations of controlling statutes. The broad reading of the FWPCA's purposes would support a broad §404 regulatory program; however, some observers doubt that the current Corps leadership is interested in using §404 as a wetlands protection tool.