Supreme Court – NEPA Scope Reduced
Seven County Infra Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado (decided May 29, 2025): The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal agencies under NEPA are not required to analyze downstream or indirect environmental impacts—courts must defer to agencies on what falls within their regulatory scope > https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-975_m648.pdf
San Francisco v. EPA (decided March 4, 2025): The Supreme Court upheld that EPA cannot include overly broad (“end-result”) provisions in NPDES permits without specifying pollutant limits > https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-753_f2bh.pdf
Youth-Led Climate Actions Against Federal Policy
Lighthiser v. Trump (filed May 29, 2025): A group of 22 youth plaintiffs in Montana are suing former President Trump, claiming his executive orders promoting fossil fuel use violate their Fifth Amendment rights to clean air and public health > https://climatecasechart.com/case/lighthiser-v-trump/
There’s ongoing momentum from similar Our Children’s Trust cases, including Held v. Montana (2023–2024), which affirmed a constitutional right to a clean environment in Montana > https://climatecasechart.com/case/11091/
State & Coalition Suits Challenging Federal Power
15-state lawsuit (last month): Led by WA and CA Attorneys General against a Trump-era “national energy emergency” executive order that fast-tracks oil and gas projects while sidestepping environmental reviews under laws like the Clean Water Act > https://stateimpactcenter.org/files/AG_Actions_Washington_v_Trump_Complaint_05.09.2025.pdf
PFAS “Forever Chemicals” Litigation
Across the nation, PFAS-focused cases are active: municipalities, utilities, and individuals are suing manufacturers and polluters over PFAS contamination in water and soil, demanding cleanup and health monitoring
“Clean Air” Rules vs. Gas Industry
California (SoCalGas) v. SCAQMD: SoCalGas and business allies are suing to overturn new air-quality regulations requiring zero-emission appliances, arguing it falls outside local regulatory authority > https://climatecasechart.com/case/california-ex-rel-south-coast-air-quality-management-district-v-southern-california-gas-co/
Offshore Wind vs. Fossil Fuel Interests
Empire Wind Project lawsuit: Fishing groups are suing the federal government and Trump administration to halt the $5B Empire Wind offshore project near NY—citing procedural violations under the Administrative Procedure Act > https://clearinghouse.net/case/46664/
“Big Oil” Misrepresentation Claims
California v. Big Oil (filed 2023, moving forward): CA is suing major oil companies (Exxon, Chevron, Shell, etc.) for alleged decades-long deception regarding climate change knowledge and impact > https://climatecasechart.com/case/people-v-exxon-mobil-corp/
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| NEPA & EPA Authority | Restricts scope of environmental reviews; could expedite infrastructure projects. |
| Youth Climate Suits | Raising constitutional arguments that clean air and health are civil rights. |
| State Coalitions | Federal-local power dynamics: states pushing back on executive overreach. |
| PFAS Litigation | Recovering trillions in cleanup costs and health burdens from legacy pollution. |
| Energy Transition Conflicts | Highlight local vs. state battles in appliance electrification and renewables rollout. |
| Corporate Accountability | Suits against fossil fuel giants may set precedence for climate liability. |
Keep an Eye On:
NEPA and EPA-related Supreme Court cases—potential blueprint for future infrastructure reviews.
Youth constitutional climate claims—might influence standing, remedies, and rights in environmental law.
PFAS cost-recovery rulings—could shape the extent of liability for water and medical harm.
Clean Air Act and renewable mandates—as states test the limits of local environmental control.
Leave A Comment