- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- New York
- /
- Environmental Justice Health Alliance for Chemical Policy Reform v. Council on Environmental Quality
Environmental Justice Health Alliance for Chemical Policy Reform v. Council on Environmental Quality
Geography
Year
2020
Document Type
Litigation
Part of
About this case
Filing year
2020
Status
Case stayed for an additional 120 days.
Geography
Docket number
1:20-cv-06143
Court/admin entity
United States → United States Federal Courts → United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)
Case category
Federal Statutory Claims (US) → NEPA (US)
Principal law
United States → Administrative Procedure Act (APA)United States → National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
At issue
Challenge to amendments of the National Environmental Policy Act regulations.
Topics
, ,
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
Beta
08/25/2022
Case stayed for an additional 120 days.
Decision
08/19/2022
Joint status report filed requesting 120-day continuation of stay of proceedings.
Status Report
04/29/2021
Stay extended for 60 days, to June 18, 2021.
Decision
02/16/2021
Stipulation
08/06/2020
Complaint filed.
Environmental groups filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the Southern District of New York challenging the Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ’s) amendments to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations. The plaintiffs alleged that the amendments would cause “real, foreseeable harms to people, communities, and the natural environment” and would cause agencies “to disregard, rather than disclose and consider, carbon pollution that threatens the integrity of our climate.” The complaint described some of the “[c]ountless unnecessary environmental harms” that plaintiffs alleged had been “identified, disclosed, and often avoided, simply because NEPA requires federal agencies to think before they act.” The plaintiffs characterized the amendments as an attempt “to revise a statute that Congress has been unwilling to repeal and rewrite” and asserted that defects in the rule rendered it illegal under the standards of the Administrative Procedure Act. Among the defects alleged in the complaint were the elimination of the requirement to consider cumulative impacts and indirect effects (which the plaintiffs alleged would make it “extremely difficult” to consider a project’s effects, including climate change impacts, on environmental justice communities) and a failure to consider and adequately address public comments (including comments that eliminating the requirement to analyze indirect and cumulative effects would prevent assessment of the impacts of federal actions on climate change).
Complaint
Summary
Challenge to amendments of the National Environmental Policy Act regulations.
Topics mentioned most in this case Beta
See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more
Group
Topics
Policy instrument
Risk
Impacted group
Just transition
Renewable energy
Fossil fuel
Greenhouse gas
Economic sector
Finance