ELR Citation: 55 ELR 20018
No(s). 1:24-cv-00089 (D.N.D. Feb 3, 2025) (Traynor, J.)

A district court granted summary judgment for a number of states in a challenge to a 2024 CEQ rule that revised regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA, including amendments in the Fiscal Responsibility Act. The states argued the rule violated NEPA and the APA by exceeding CEQ's authority and making changes inconsistent with the authorizing act; was arbitrary and capricious; violated NEPA because Congress did not authorize the agency to create a document that avoided a full NEPA analysis of projects with significant impacts; and violated the major questions doctrine by exceeding the agency's authority and affecting topics of major economic significance. The court found the text of NEPA did not give CEQ authority to issue binding regulations and only authorized the agency to make recommendations to the president, and thus CEQ did not have authority under NEPA to issue regulations. It further found the rule was arbitrary and capricious because CEQ did not engage in reasoned decisionmaking when it changed the language in NEPA's purpose section and drafted sections to require evaluation of Indigenous knowledge for all projects, and that the rule was irrational to allow applicants to submit environmental analysis but prohibit them from finding no significant impact. The court held CEQ has no rulemaking authority, and that the rule was invalid and vacated as a matter of law.