Summary
- One year after the Supreme Court's ruling in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, courts are increasingly applying a deferential standard in NEPA cases, limiting the scope of environmental reviews.
- The unanimous decision emphasized that agencies need not analyze effects from projects outside their jurisdiction or those occurring separately in time and place.
- Courts have upheld agency decisions based on this ruling, reinforcing the principle of substantial deference in both Environmental Impact Statements and Environmental Assessments.
- As NEPA regulations evolve, litigants face higher hurdles in challenging agency decisions regarding upstream and downstream effects, reshaping the landscape of environmental law.
Join the discussion — sign up to comment, upvote, and save articles.