Supreme Court backs Utah oil railroad expansion and scales back a key environmental law

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Thursday backed a multibillion-dollar oil railroad expansion in Utah, endorsing a limited interpretation of a key environmental law.

The 8-0 decision comes after an appeal to the high court from backers of the project, which is aimed at quadrupling oil production in the remote area of sandstone and sagebrush.

Supporters said restricting the scope of environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act would speed development. The case centers on the Uinta Basin Railway, a proposed 88-mile (142-kilometer) expansion that would connect oil and gas producers to the broader rail network and allow them to access larger markets.

The justices reversed a lower court decision and restored a critical approval from federal regulators on the Surface Transportation Board. The project could still face additional legal and regulatory hurdles.

Environmental groups and a Colorado county had argued that regulators must consider a broad range of potential impacts when they consider new development, including the potential impact of producing and refining so much more oil.

The justices, though, found that regulators were right to consider the direct effects of the project, rather than the wider upstream and downstream impact.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote that courts should defer to regulators on “where to draw the line” on what factors to take into account. Four other conservative justices joined his opinion.

The court’s conservative majority court has taken steps to curtail the power of federal regulators in other cases, including striking down the decades-old Chevron doctrine that made it easier for the federal government to set a wide range of regulations.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor agreed with the outcome, but with a different legal reasoning. She said federal regulators do not have the authority to take into account any harms caused by the oil that might eventually be carried on the railway. She was joined by her two liberal colleagues.

Justice Neil Gorsuch did not participate in the case after facing calls to step aside over ties to Philip Anschutz, a Colorado billionaire whose ownership of oil wells in the area means he could benefit if the project goes through. Gorsuch, as a lawyer in private practice, had represented Anschutz.