SCOTUS Streamlines NEPA Requirements, Offering Relief From Project Delays

What happened: ARTBA and its allies scored a permitting victory May 29 when the U.S. Supreme Court sided with transportation construction project proponents who argued that National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews should not have to consider indirect environmental impacts.

Citing ARTBA’s brief, the Justices acknowledged a broken permitting process that contributes to significant delays and increased costs for infrastructure projects like highways and bridges. The decision also reinforced the need for agencies to act swiftly and judiciously in NEPA reviews, and that courts should defer to the agency if basic requirements have been satisfied.

Why it matters: The Court’s ruling in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County ensures federal agencies can move necessary projects forward without getting bogged down by speculative or tangential environmental claims.

ARTBA has long advocated for faster permitting, emphasizing that NEPA is procedural and not meant to dictate outcomes. In March, the White House Council on Environmental Quality issued an interim final rule rescinding its NEPA regulations and signaling a more advisory role in overseeing NEPA compliance.

What’s next: The decision signals to Congress that NEPA is being misused and is due for reform. In recent recommendations to lawmakers, ARTBA called for expanded use of categorical exclusions and enforcement of the timelines set by the Fiscal Responsibility Act which would limit reviews to two years.

If you have questions about the ruling, ARTBA’s Rich Juliano or Prianka Sharma are the contacts.