What to watch in this U.S. Supreme Court term
At its best, the U.S. Supreme Court has advanced justice by applying our laws in a fair, equitable way to address some of the most pressing issues of our time.
But in recent years, the court has frequently ruled in favor of polluters who put the health of our communities and environment at risk — at times disregarding long-standing legal precedents to do so.
One alarming trend to keep an eye out for is the rising number of consequential cases the court has taken up on its emergency docket, which has come to be known as the “shadow docket,” intended for rare cases where immediate action is needed.
Unlike cases heard in the regular merits docket, the timeframe for shadow docket cases is usually accelerated, with limited briefing, no oral argument, and limited or no explanation for the court’s decision. The shadow docket is playing a more robust—and dangerous—role in the court and raises some significant concerns by allowing litigants to secure big changes like blocking rules without a fully fleshed out record in a lower court.
There is no question that the stakes are high with the court’s current term underway, featuring several major environmental cases, and additional regulatory rollbacks from the incoming Trump administration on the horizon.
Ripple effects from the previous term
Decisions from the Supreme Court’s previous term have chipped away at longstanding norms that have governed the way we practice law, especially judicial oversight of government agencies. Two notably consequential decisions from the last term are the Loper Bright and Corner Post cases.
Loper Bright
- This ruling stripped authority from expert agencies we rely on to protect our health, safety, and the environment and gave it to individual judges.
- It overturned the Chevron doctrine, a 40-year precedent under which courts give deference to expert agencies’ interpretations of the statutes that Congress tasked them with implementing.
- And it significantly shifts power from executive branch agencies to the judiciary, making it easier for industry interests to challenge longstanding health and environmental regulations going forward.
Corner Post
- This ruling swept away deadlines for filing legal challenges to many government regulations, allowing agency rules or actions to be challenged any time a new business or group alleges harm instead of six years from when the action or rulemaking was finalized.
- This is another decision paving the way for more industry challenges to longstanding regulations, land preservation decisions, and other agency actions.
Time will tell how these and other decisions will shape our regulatory landscape. But they increasingly point to a system with fewer stable environmental protections and more constraints on the federal government’s ability to ensure communities are safe and healthy.
Environmental cases in the current term
These cases could have sizable implications for our region:
San Francisco vs. EPA
- This case asks the Supreme Court to take away a key component of Clean Water Act permits that states and EPA use all the time to keep us safe and protect our clean water in rivers, lakes, and streams.
- If the Supreme Court goes along with this attempted rollback of the Clean Water Act, families all over the country will lose important protections against water pollution. SELC has filed an amicus, or “friend of the court,” brief in the case in support of EPA.
Seven County Infrastructure Coalition vs. Eagle County, CO
- In a dispute over railroad permits, this case challenges the longstanding approach to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that requires an agency to study environmental impacts beyond the immediate effects of the action over which the agency has regulatory authority.
- A bedrock environmental law, NEPA remains our most valuable tool for community input on projects that impact them and gives a voice to those that have long suffered environmental injustices.
Oklahoma vs. EPA; PacifiCorp vs. EPA; EPA vs. Calumet Shreveport
- These cases each address whether challenges to EPA actions under the Clean Air Act must be brought in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which typically hears such cases, or in other venues that may be friendlier to the challengers.
A notable shadow docket case
The Supreme Court recently issued a ruling in a shadow docket case: East Kentucky Power Co-Op vs. EPA. SELC and other organizations representing local conservation groups are defending EPA’s legacy coal ash disposal rule after industry interests challenged the rule in the D.C. Circuit. One utility sought to block the rule from going into effect to avoid having to install groundwater monitoring wells while the case is pending, a request the Supreme Court denied.
This is good news for the families and communities everywhere whose drinking water is threatened by coal ash pollution. We’ll keep fighting to protect and enforce these commonsense requirements.
Nick Torrey, SELC Senior Attorney
The East Kentucky Power Co-Op ruling ensures that the vital protections of EPA’s coal ash rule — which prohibits leaving coal ash sitting in water and leaking pollutants from unlined pits and requires utilities to clean up the pollution they have caused for decades — will remain in effect for now.
SELC is ready for what’s ahead
Despite an increasingly challenging legal landscape at the federal, regional, and local levels, SELC and our partners are prepared to defend the integrity of our legal system and the bedrock environmental laws that protect Southern communities.
Rooted in our place-based knowledge and expertise, our collaborative work at the state and local levels with partners and communities on the ground is crucial to navigate difficult judicial challenges across the courts. From ensuring the basic right to clean air and water to addressing longstanding environmental injustices, we are driving change in the courtroom, in the halls of government, and alongside communities.
We will continue to work with Congress and federal agencies to ensure that future rulemakings follow the law and are based in sound science. Our role in legal and regulatory procedures and work with agencies over the last four years to make sure their regulations are as well-supported and durable as possible is more essential than it’s ever been.
We’ll continue to litigate in all court systems to temper the impact of these decisions, frame the issues with the facts, and defend laws still on the books.
Kym Meyer, SELC Litigation Director
And while there have been significant changes to the regulatory landscape, many foundational laws remain on the books that are critical to righting environmental wrongs.
“The stakes are high, but SELC is ready to defend critical environmental protections we all depend on and commonsense regulations we must uphold,” says SELC Litigation Director Kym Meyer. “We will continue to litigate in all court systems to temper the impact of these decisions, frame the issues with the facts, and defend laws still on the books.”