News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Environmental Litigation

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies and Streamlines NEPA Requirements

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

On May 29, 2025 the Supreme Court issued a decision that has the practical effect of reducing the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, and making it more likely that agency environmental reviews...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies NEPA Scope in Seven County Decision, Distinguishes Sabal Trail

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on

In a significant decision issued on May 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court found that the Surface Transportation Board (the Board) was entitled to substantial deference under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and...more

Vinson & Elkins LLP

Supreme Court Curbs the Scope of NEPA Reviews in Landmark Decision: Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County,...

Vinson & Elkins LLP on

In the first major National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) case to reach the Supreme Court in almost two decades, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision on May 29, 2025, in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v....more

Allen Matkins

“A Course Correction”: Supreme Court Reinforces Agency Deference and Narrows the Scope of Environmental Effects that Agencies Must...

Allen Matkins on

On May 29, 2025, the Supreme Court held that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) — which requires federal agencies to analyze the environmental impacts of projects that they carry out, fund, or approve — does not...more

Hanson Bridgett

The Supreme Court Takes Aim at NEPA

Hanson Bridgett on

On May 29, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its Opinion in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition et al. v. Eagle County, Colorado et al., one of the most high-profile National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, cases to reach...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

One-Track Mind: Unanimous SCOTUS Decision on Rail Line Approval Further Narrows Scope of NEPA

Troutman Pepper Locke on

On May 29, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado that dramatically changes the way courts scrutinize federal agencies’ environmental reviews under the...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

The Supreme Court Issues a Major Course Correction, Limiting The Role of Federal Courts in NEPA Cases

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP on

On May 29, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a decision in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, limiting the role of federal courts in National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) cases. The Court recognized that...more

Allen Matkins

California Environmental Law & Policy Update 5.30.25

Allen Matkins on

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in favor of an alliance of local counties that support a planned 88-mile railroad project in Utah, concluding that the federal environmental review process did not have to consider...more

Epstein Becker & Green

Impact on the Environment and Potentially Greater Impact on Administrative Law - SCOTUS Today

Epstein Becker & Green on

Readers of this blog will recall our recent discussion concerning the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, in which the Court overruled the long-standing doctrine of Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Supreme Court Restores Agency Deference In NEPA Reviews

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

On May 29, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued an 8-0 opinion in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition, et al. v. Eagle County, Colorado, et al. that affirmed agency deference in review of environmental documents...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - May 29, 2025

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued one decision today: Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado, No. 23-975: This case concerns the scope of federal court review over an agency’s...more

Bracewell LLP

Supreme Court Hits the Reset Button on the National Environmental Policy Act

Bracewell LLP on

On May 29, 2025, the US Supreme Court pressed the reset button on the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), issuing an 8-0 decision intended to convert what NEPA has become, a “judicial oak,” back into the originally...more

Cozen O'Connor

Democratic AGs Go For Broke on PFAS Manufacturer Bankruptcy Deal

Cozen O'Connor on

A group of six Democratic AGs filed an objection to a proposed bankruptcy plan for firefighting foam manufacturer Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. (“KFI”), claiming that the deal would allow KFi to avoid billions in potential liabilities...more

Nossaman LLP

Rewriting the Rules: The Supreme Court's Landmark Decision on Clean Water Act Permits

Nossaman LLP on

In this episode of Digging Into Land Use Law, Byron Gee, Willis Hon and Sara Johnson review in detail the recent Supreme Court opinion in City and County of San Francisco vs. EPA and its implications for Clean Water Act...more

Mintz

Colorado Supreme Court Allows Climate Tort Litigation to Proceed

Mintz on

On May 12, 2025, in a 5-2 decision, the Colorado Supreme Court held that the tort claims brought by local governments in Colorado against major fossil fuel companies concerning damages stemming from climate change could...more

Allen Matkins

California Environmental Law & Policy Update 5.2.25

Allen Matkins on

The White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) circulated a draft template, dated April 8, 2025, to assist federal agencies in updating their procedures for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)....more

Bricker Graydon LLP

Supreme Court Limits EPA Permitting Authority in City and County of San Fran v. US EPA

Bricker Graydon LLP on

On March 4, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5-4 opinion in City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, holding that “end-result” requirements routinely imposed by the EPA in NPDES permits issued...more

Williams Mullen

Clean Water Act: The End of “End-Result” Permitting

Williams Mullen on

The Supreme Court of the United States’ recent Clean Water Act decision in City of San Francisco v. EPA has sent shockwaves through the environmental community by prohibiting EPA and state agencies’ common practice of...more

Dickinson Wright

Supreme Court Limits EPA's Power Over NPDES Water Permits

Dickinson Wright on

In a much-anticipated decision, the U.S. Supreme Court significantly narrowed the EPA's authority under the Clean Water Act (CWA) to impose so-called "end-result" requirements in NPDES permits. These "end-result" requirements...more

Goldberg Segalla

U.S. Supreme Court Ends Youth Climate Change Suit

Goldberg Segalla on

On March 24, in Kelsey Cascadia Rose Juliana et al. v. United States of America et al., the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a petition to hear an appeal from Our Children’s Trust from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision...more

Foley Hoag LLP - Energy & Climate Counsel

Climate Litigation Against the US Is Dead. How Long Will State Climate Damage Cases Survive?

Foley Hoag LLP - Energy & Climate Counsel on

On Monday morning, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Juliana v. United States. The cert. denial leaves in place the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision that ordered the case dismissed for lack of standing. At least for...more

Perkins Coie

San Francisco v. EPA: Supreme Court Decides Clean Water Act Permits May Not Include Receiving Water Limits

Perkins Coie on

In City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, 604 U.S. ___, 145 S. Ct. 704 (2025), in a 5-4 decision issued on March 4, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down two provisions in San...more

Bracewell LLP

EPA and the Army Make More Waves on WOTUS

Bracewell LLP on

On March 12, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army took steps to address lingering questions about the meaning and implementation of “waters of the United States” (WOTUS)...more

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck

Supreme Court Makes Waves In San Francisco Ruling

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck on

When the Supreme Court issued its decision in City & County of San Francisco v. EPA on March 4, 2025, it may have saved San Francisco $10 billion dollars in penalties sought by the United States Environmental Protection...more

Holland & Hart LLP

Supreme Court Invalidates "End-Result" Provisions in Clean Water Act Discharge Permits

Holland & Hart LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court last week, in a 5-4 decision, held that discharge permit “end-result” requirements—those that make a permittee responsible for the quality of the receiving water into which the permittee discharges—are...more

71 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3
Next »

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide