On May 29, 2025, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) held a virtual public workshop to review and discuss its rulemaking response to California Senate Bills (SBs) 253, 261, and 219, which require companies that “do business in California” and meet certain revenue thresholds to publicly disclose their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and material climate-related financial risks. Although CARB staff presented some “initial staff concepts” concerning CARB’s approach to implementing SBs 253 and 261, CARB asked more questions than it provided answers. The clear takeaway from the workshop was that CARB has a long way to go before it is ready to issue a formal notice of proposed rulemaking on SBs 253 or 261, and there is still an open question of whether CARB will issue guidance or regulations for SB 261, which is self-implementing.

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.

I.  General Background

On December 17, 2024, the Railroad Commission of Texas (RRC) adopted new comprehensive regulations governing the handling, storage, treatment, and disposal of oil and gas waste. The rules were published January 3, 2025, in the Texas Register and become effective on July 1, 2025. They codify formerly informal guidance and ad hoc permitting practices and also update existing oil and gas waste regulations to align with technological advancements.

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.

The California legislature continues to advance Senate Bill 601 (SB 601), the “Right to Clean Water Act,”[1] which aims to safeguard protections for California’s streams and wetlands that lost federal protection under the Clean Water Act (CWA) as a result of the Supreme Court’s 2023 Sackett v. U.S. EPA decision. If approved, SB 601 would expand enforcement to include citizen suits and increase penalties for unpermitted discharges to state waters.

On Wednesday, April 16, Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum directed the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) to order Equinor to “stop work” on its 812 megawatt Empire Wind 1 project just outside of New York Harbor. This project is a major component of New York’s plan to meet its 2040 carbon zero goal, and received all of its federal approvals in 2023 and 2024 after more than four years of intensive federal, state, and local environmental review. Equinor began active construction almost immediately after receiving full permitting approval in early 2024 and resumed marine activities in Spring 2025.

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.

Challenging a slew of state climate-related laws and programs, President Trump’s April 8, 2025 executive order (EO) set the stage for more legal fights between the federal government and states. In the new EO, “Protecting American Energy from State Overreach,” Trump took aim at state laws and programs that address greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), climate change, environmental justice, and environmental, social, and governance (ESG). Some states have already indicated they will oppose the Trump administration’s efforts.

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.