Plain-English summary
Court: Give agencies deference on whether NEPA requires studying effects they lack authority to prevent
The Court reversed the D.C. Circuit, holding that courts must give substantial deference to agencies (here, the Surface Transportation Board) when deciding whether the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires studying environmental effects that the agency lacks power to prevent. The case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with that standard.
Why this matters
This decision clarifies how much leeway federal agencies get when deciding what environmental impacts they must study under NEPA. It affects the scope of environmental review for many infrastructure and federal-permitted projects, potentially reducing the range of indirect effects agencies are required to analyze when the agencies lack power to address those effects directly.
Who may feel it
- Federal agencies that carry out or authorize projects (especially the Surface Transportation Board)
- Local governments and county governments involved in infrastructure projects
- Project opponents and environmental groups seeking broad NEPA reviews
- Developers and businesses seeking federal approvals for infrastructure
- Communities near infrastructure projects concerned about indirect impacts
Key questions