Supreme Court overturns block on Utah railroad project
May 29 (UPI) -- The Supreme Court unanimously reversed a ruling from a lower court Thursday that had stopped a proposed Utah railroad line based on possible environmental effects for which it wouldn't be directly responsible.
"We reverse," wrote Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh in the case, in regard to a previous decision by the U.S. Court Of Appeals for D.C., which had halted a group of local Utah counties from the creation of a railroad to move oil in 2020.
The counties, aligned as the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition, had applied to the U. S. Surface Transportation Board to create an 88-mile rail line that would connect Utah's oil-rich Uinta Basin to the national freight rail network, in order to transport crude oil to refineries along the Gulf Coast.
Despite the preparation and presentation of an environmental impact statement, or EIS, as required by federal law via the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, the project was derailed by a lawsuit. Eagle County, Colo., along with a contingent of environmental groups, sued on the basis that the coalition's EIS didn't properly analyze the potential impacts of increased oil drilling in the Uinta Basin and subsequent crude oil refinement.
The Board had approved the project, but the U.S. Court Of Appeals for D.C. ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, on a judgement that declared the EIS violated NEPA due to its lack of information in regard to the drilling and refinement and vacated the whole project.
Kavanaugh wrote that the "D.C. Circuit failed to afford the Board the substantial judicial deference required in NEPA cases and incorrectly interpreted NEPA to require the Board to consider the environmental effects of upstream and downstream projects that are separate in time or place from the [proposed] Uinta Basin Railway."
He further called the creation of NEPA a "legislative acorn," which he says grew into a "judicial oak that has hindered infrastructure development 'under the guise" of just a little more process."
Kavanaugh wrote that Supreme Court's reversal of the D.C. Court's ruling served as a "course correction of sorts" that would bring judicial review under NEPA back in line with "common sense."
Justice Neil Gorsuch recused himself from the case due to his links to the owner of an oil and gas procurement company who had included a brief of support that backed the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
30 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Supreme Court makes it easier to claim 'reverse discrimination' in employment, in a case from Ohio
WASHINGTON (AP) — A unanimous Supreme Court made it easier Thursday to bring lawsuits over so-called reverse discrimination, siding with an Ohio woman who claims she didn't get a job and then was demoted because she is straight. The justices' decision affects lawsuits in 20 states and the District of Columbia where, until now, courts had set a higher bar when members of a majority group, including those who are white and heterosexual, sue for discrimination under federal law. The court ruled in an appeal from Marlean Ames, who has worked for the Ohio Department of Youth Services for more than 20 years. Ames contends she was passed over for a promotion and then demoted because she is heterosexual. Both the job she sought and the one she had held were given to LGBTQ people. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bars sex discrimination in the workplace. A trial court and the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Ames. The 6th circuit is among the courts that had required an additional requirement for people like Ames, showing 'background circumstances' that might include that LGBTQ people made the decisions affecting Ames or statistical evidence of a pattern of discrimination against members of the majority group.
Washington Post
31 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Supreme Court backs Catholic Charities in tax exemption case
The Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously sided with a Catholic charity in Wisconsin, saying it should have qualified for a tax exemption in a decision that has implications for other religiously-affiliated nonprofits. The justices reversed a decision from the Wisconsin Supreme Court that denied Catholic Charities the same tax exemption that the Catholic Church receives because the group's social services programs are 'primarily charitable and secular' in nature.
CNN
33 minutes ago
- CNN
Supreme Court backs Catholic Charities' push to object to state taxes on religious grounds
The Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for a Catholic Charities chapter in Wisconsin to secure an exemption from certain state taxes in a decision that could expand the type of religious entities entitled to tax breaks under the First Amendment's protections for religion. It was the latest in a series of decisions from the Supreme Court in recent years that have sided with religious groups on everything from public funding for sectarian schools to allowing coaches to offer private prayers on the field after high school football games. 'It is fundamental to our constitutional order that the government maintain 'neutrality between religion and religion,'' Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for a unanimous court. 'There may be hard calls to make in policing that rule, but this is not one. When the government distinguishes among religions based on theological differences in their provision of services, it imposes a denominational preference that must satisfy the highest level of judicial scrutiny.' This story is breaking and will be updated.
