On Monday, June 9, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) opened a short, 30-day public comment period soliciting information and comments to, “improve the overall efficiency and effectiveness” of Section 10(a) take permitting under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). If it seems like Section 10(a) just underwent a comment period not too long ago, that’s because it did. In 2023, under the Biden Administration, FWS solicited comments on proposed revisions to the regulations implementing that section, which were finalized last April. Now, the Trump Administration is seeking suggestions on how to further revise its ESA permitting rules.
One-Track Mind: Unanimous SCOTUS Decision on Rail Line Approval Further Narrows Scope of NEPA
On May 29, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado that dramatically changes the way courts scrutinize federal agencies’ environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for a five-justice conservative majority (with Justice Neil Gorsuch abstaining), held that (a) courts must afford federal agencies “substantial judicial deference” regarding both the scope and contents of their environmental analyses; and (b) courts do not need to consider the effects of the action to the extent they are “separate in time or place” from the proposed project. The ruling gives federal agencies permission to greatly streamline their NEPA analyses at a time when those agencies are rapidly being drained of their resources and facing increasing pressure to expedite lengthy permitting processes.
California’s AB 550: A Blueprint for Balancing Development and Species Conservation
California’s drive toward a net-zero carbon economy by 2045 is sparking innovative solutions to harmonize environmental conservation with infrastructure development. Assembly Bill (AB) 550, sponsored by Assembly Member Petrie-Norris, aims to amend the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) by permitting renewable energy projects to take unlisted but “at-risk” species. The proposed legislation recognizes the dual imperative of advancing clean energy while conserving California’s biodiversity.
No Harm, No Foul? Services Propose to Remove Harm Definition from Endangered Species Act Regulations
On April 17, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (together Services) published a proposed rule to rescind the long-standing definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The proposal appears to be one of the first in response to President Trump’s April 9 Presidential Memorandum, “Directing the Repeal of Unlawful Regulations,” which directs federal agencies to revise or rescind regulations that conflict with the plain meaning of the underlying statute. If adopted, it will significantly change the ESA’s implementation. The FWS and NMFS are taking comments on the proposed rule from April 17 through May 17.
Twin Killings: Executive Orders Put Existing Energy Regulations in the Crosshairs
On the evening of April 9, 2025, the Trump administration released a pair of deregulatory executive actions that could have major implications for any industry subject to federal rules — and are also likely to be a magnet for litigation. These orders come fast on the heels of an April 8 executive order, “Protecting American Energy from State Overreach,” which announces actions to curtail state and local laws and policies focused on climate change and environmental justice.
President Trump Moves to Repeal NEPA Regulations
UPDATE
On February 19, the White House unveiled an interim final rule (IFR) to rescind all National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) implementing regulations that the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has promulgated since 1977. The IFR takes effect immediately and bypasses the usual public notice and comment process for rulemakings by invoking the “good cause” exception in the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)[1], although its publication in the Federal Register will trigger a 30-day public comment period.
Keeping Track of the Trump Executive Actions
President Trump hit the ground running, issuing more executive orders, memoranda, and other actions on Inauguration Day than any previous president. Agencies are already working to implement those actions. Many of the actions are interrelated, so Troutman Pepper Locke’s Environmental + Natural Resources team has put together the following resource to help assess the impact of these actions on environmental policy, and how the various actions fit together.
A Hard Look at CEQ’s Hard Luck: North Dakota Court Decision Accelerates NEPA Regulations’ Rapid Fall
This past Monday, the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota issued its ruling in the closely watched case of Iowa v. Council on Envtl. Quality, 1:24-cv-089 (D.N.D. Feb. 3, 2025), vacating the Biden administration’s Phase 2 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) rule on the grounds that the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) overstepped its authority when it first promulgated NEPA regulations in 1978. This decision was just the latest in a series of falling dominos over the past three months that have completely upended NEPA practice both inside and outside of the federal government.
First Day Presidential Directives May Have Broad Implications for Wind Industry
Among President Donald Trump’s directives issued on his first day in office was a Presidential Memorandum targeting wind energy, which has been a significant source of new electricity generation in the United States over the past decade, totaling around 10% of utility-scale generation. Among other things, the Memorandum “temporarily” withdraws
California Law Highlights the Need to Prepare for Climate Disclosures
The march toward mandated corporate disclosures for climate-related risks continues. Despite significant pushback and substantial legal challenges, state legislatures and regulators are continuing to advance laws and rules that will require disclosures of both greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate risks.
California Senate Bill (SB) 219, signed into law