News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Regulatory Authority › Statutory Interpretation

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 -
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

SCOTUS Affirms Rules for Challenging Nuclear Regulatory Commission Licenses

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on

In Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas, a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Interim Storage Partners, LLC (ISP) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The case...more

Benesch

SCOTUS Rejects FCC Edicts: Courts are (Finally) Free to Interpret the TCPA

Benesch on

In a highly anticipated decision with broad implications for Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) litigants, on June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v....more

Cooley LLP

SCOTUS Continues to Limit Authority of Regulatory Agencies by Empowering District Courts to Reject FCC Interpretations

Cooley LLP on

Suppose an administrative agency issues a rule governing private conduct. And suppose no one uses an available judicial review process to challenge that rule before it takes effect. If that rule is then invoked against a...more

Holland & Knight LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Decides Nuclear Regulatory Commission Procedural Issue

Holland & Knight LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court on June 18, 2025, decided Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas, 605 U.S. ___ (2025), which involved challenges to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC or Commission) decision to grant a...more

McGuireWoods LLP

SCOTUS Allows Private Company’s License for Stand-Alone Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage Facility

McGuireWoods LLP on

On June 18, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Nuclear Regulatory Commission, et al. v. Texas, et al., reinstated a license originally issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), permitting the storage of depleted...more

Hogan Lovells

Supreme Court decides interim storage case on procedural grounds in NRC v. Texas

Hogan Lovells on

On Wednesday, June 18, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its opinion in NRC v. Texas to resolve a circuit split over the storage of spent nuclear fuel between the Tenth Circuit, D.C. Circuit, and Fifth...more

Holland & Hart LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies Path for Nuclear License Challenges and NRC Authority

Holland & Hart LLP on

The Supreme Court’s decision in NRC v. Texas gives nuclear energy generators and storage facilities, as well as NRC, the latest win in the decades-long struggle over used-fuel storage....more

Jones Day

U.S. Supreme Court Instructs Courts to Provide "Substantial Deference" to Agencies in NEPA Cases

Jones Day on

On May 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, clarifying the standards for judicial review of challenges to agency action under the National Environmental Policy Act...more

Downey Brand LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Limits Use of Environmental Review as a Roadblock

Downey Brand LLP on

On May 29, 2025, in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado (2025) 605 U.S. ____, the Supreme Court gave instruction that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) “is a procedural cross-check, not...more

DLA Piper

Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County: Top Points

DLA Piper on

Supreme Court aims to provide predictability by narrowing the scope of NEPA review - The Supreme Court’s latest ruling in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County marks a significant “course correction” in how...more

Quarles & Brady LLP

SCOTUS Unanimously Limits Scope of NEPA in Major Infrastructure Ruling

Quarles & Brady LLP on

Seven County Infrastructure Coalition et al. v. Eagle County, Colorado, et al. The U.S. Supreme Court recently clarified the scope of federal agency review requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”)...more

Stoel Rives - Environmental Law Blog

Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County: Agencies Granted Substantial Deference in Assessing Project Scope and...

Stoel Rives - Environmental Law Blog on

In a significant decision interpreting the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado on May 29, 2025. For certain...more

McGlinchey Stafford

SCOTUS Reins in NEPA Scope in Seven County

McGlinchey Stafford on

In a landmark ruling issued May 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed the D.C. Circuit in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado, sharply limiting the scope of environmental review...more

Greenberg Glusker LLP

Supreme Court Narrows EPA’s Authority to Set Limitations in Clean Water Act Permits

Greenberg Glusker LLP on

On March 4, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency, holding that EPA does not have the authority to issue “end-result” requirements in National...more

Perkins Coie

Supreme Court Issues “Course-Correcting” NEPA Decision

Perkins Coie on

The Supreme Court of the United States’ opinion, issued May 29, 2025, in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado, reaffirms the Court’s earlier, seminal decisions expounding judicial review under the...more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Pruning NEPA’s Branches: The Supreme Court Reshapes Environmental Reviews for Major Actions

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

Over the last half century, federal courts have interpreted the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to require federal agencies to study an ever-growing range of indirect effects and impacts when approving large...more

Jenner & Block

Supreme Court Limits Scope of NEPA’s Analysis of Upstream and Downstream Environmental Impacts of Federal Actions

Jenner & Block on

On May 29, 2025, in a 8-0 ruling (Justice Gorsuch recused himself from the case), the Supreme Court held that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit erred in requiring federal regulators to evaluate the potential...more

Latham & Watkins LLP

US Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Review Under NEPA

Latham & Watkins LLP on

The decision emphasizes the importance of judicial deference to agencies on NEPA and narrows the scope of environmental analyses....more

Clark Hill PLC

The demise of “Chevron Deference” on the federal level has also arrived in the Arizona state courts

Clark Hill PLC on

Changes in federal and many states’ laws (e.g., just last month in Arizona) may put industry on more equal footing with agencies when interpreting rules and permit terms. If agencies have overreached on these interpretations,...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

Snell & Wilmer

Supreme Court Upholds ATF Rule Regulating Weapon Parts Kits and Unfinished Frames or Receivers as “Firearms”

Snell & Wilmer on

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court affirmed the authority of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to regulate weapon parts kits and unfinished frames or receivers as “firearms” under the Gun...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

White House Issues Memorandum Directing Federal Agencies to Repeal Regulations Deemed to be Unlawful Pursuant to Recent U.S....

Troutman Pepper Locke on

On April 9, the White House issued a memorandum directing federal executive departments and agencies to repeal regulations deemed unlawful pursuant to certain U.S. Supreme Court decisions. This directive aims to address...more

Wiley Rein LLP

Trump Directs Agencies to Quickly Repeal Unlawful Regulations, Without Notice-and-Comment

Wiley Rein LLP on

On April 9, 2025, President Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum (Memorandum) entitled Directing the Repeal of Unlawful Regulations. The Memorandum – part of a broader “Department of Government Efficiency” Deregulatory...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

Cranfill Sumner LLP

United States Supreme Court Upholds Biden Administration’s Regulation of Ghost Guns

Cranfill Sumner LLP on

In November 2023 we discussed the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision to strike down a Biden-era firearm regulation concerning “ghost guns,” concluding that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF)...more

316 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 13
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