- Decision limits overreach in NEPA process that has delayed critical energy infrastructure
- Consumers have paid higher energy costs due to activist weaponization of environmental reviews
WASHINGTON – Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA), the leading energy and environmental advocate for families and businesses, today applauded the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County that places sensible limits on environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
CEA joined nine other trade organizations in an amici curiae brief urging the court to limit the NEPA process to its enabling legislation and not allow for the inclusion of effects outside the agency’s purview.
The Court ruled 8-0 that environmental analyses must focus on effects that are directly related to projects under review and fall within the purview of approving agencies, rather than requiring expansive reviews of indirect or speculative impacts. Justice Neil Gorsuch recused himself.
CEA President David Holt said the Court’s decision brings much-needed clarity to a process that has been weaponized by activist groups to delay or derail critical energy infrastructure projects.
“Justice Kavanaugh got it exactly right when he wrote that NEPA is a procedural cross-check, not a substantive roadblock, and that the goal is to inform agency decision-making, not to paralyze it,” Holt said. “For too long, we’ve watched critical infrastructure projects – from transmission lines to natural gas pipelines to power generating facilities – get delayed, denied, or abandoned because activist groups have turned environmental reviews into litigation roadblocks that have cost consumers untold billions of dollars.”
“It is heartening to see the Supreme Court rule unanimously on such an important case, and prove once again that our institutions are strong,” he said.
Holt noted that these litigation-induced delays have real consequences for American families and businesses who depend on affordable, reliable energy.
“When infrastructure projects get tied up in endless litigation and bureaucratic delays, it constrains our energy supply and delivery systems,” Holt said. “The result is higher energy costs for families and reduced reliability for businesses trying to power our economy. This Supreme Court decision helps restore balance to a process that should facilitate responsible energy development, not obstruct it.”
The case involved the 88-mile Uinta Basin Railway project in Utah, designed to transport crude oil to the national railway network.
The ruling comes as the nation faces ongoing challenges in developing the energy infrastructure needed to meet growing demand while maintaining affordability and reliability for consumers.
###
About Consumer Energy Alliance
Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA) is the trusted voice advocating for affordable, reliable, and cleaner energy solutions that benefit all Americans. Representing families, farmers, small businesses, distributors, producers, and manufacturers, CEA champions sensible, balanced policies that support economic growth and environmental resiliency; and ensures families and businesses are a vocal part of the nation’s energy dialogue. Every day, we work to inspire practical, responsible solutions that meet America’s energy needs while protecting the environment for generations to come.
Contact:
Bryson Hull
(202) 657-2855
bhull@consumerenergyalliance.org