SCOTUS Decision Regarding Environmental Review
- Julia Shepteban
- Jun 3
- 1 min read
In the case Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled (five in the majority opinion, three with concurring opinions, one did not participate) to limit the scope of environmental review based on the National Environmental Policy Act.
Facts of the Case:
The Surface Transportation Board granted eligibility for a railroad project in Utah. The railroad’s purpose is to transport oil from Utah’s Uinta Basin to the national rail network. The Surface Transportation Board was required by the National Environmental Policy Act to research the environmental effects that this project could pose and prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. The Surface Transportation Board reviewed factors like water resources, air quality, and land use, but did not research potential environmental challenges. In their Environmental Impact Statement, the Board did not include possible “downstream impacts” like potential oil spills along the Colorado River. They defended this by arguing that increases in train traffic are unlikely to pose substantial environmental damages and that some effects were beyond the scope of their regulatory authority.
Question of the case:
In simple terms, the question was asking if the National Environmental Policy Act requires an agency to study potential environmental effects from factors that it doesn’t control or possible events that could happen in the future.
Outcome:
The National Environmental Policy Act only applies to direct environmental consequences proposed by the project itself. NEPA requires federal agencies to look over the direct environmental effects that a federal project can pose, but cannot block a project because of environmental issues that the project might cause in the future.
Sources:
Comments