Supreme Court Debates Environmental Review Limits in Utah Railway Project

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering limiting the extent to which federal agencies must assess environmental impacts of projects, focusing on a proposed Utah railway for crude oil. The case questions the scope of federal environmental reviews amid concerns about overreach versus regulatory loopholes.

The U.S. Supreme Court appears set to restrict how far federal agencies must go in evaluating environmental impacts of projects under their purview. The issue arose from a blocked railway project in Utah, expected to transport crude oil and opposed by environmentalists and a Colorado county.

The 88-mile railway aims to link Utah's Uinta Basin with a freight network. While justices from both sides questioned the lower court's decision, worries grew over the balance between necessary reviews and excessive judicial intervention. Kavanaugh highlighted the unintended expansion of environmental evaluations due to aggressive court actions.

This case challenges the interpretation of the National Environmental Policy Act, which demands examination of a project's "reasonably foreseeable" effects. The Supreme Court's decision could redefine the boundaries of such evaluations, with a verdict due by June.

(With inputs from agencies.)