WHAT WE'RE READING
The morning read for Wednesday, April 10

By Ellena Erskine
on Apr 10, 2024 at 10:18 am

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Wednesday morning read:

• Some Jan. 6 rioters win early release, even before key Supreme Court ruling (Spencer S. Hsu, The Washington Post)
• Utah, trade groups ask Supreme Court to review oil rail line (Niina H. Fara, E&E News)

{snip}

Utah oil-train backers petition U.S. Supreme Court to restore railway’s approval

Uinta Basin Railway would dramatically increase hazardous materials shipments through Colorado

BY: DAVID O. WILLIAMS - MARCH 13, 2024 2:37 PM



Freight trains sit idle in railyards in Grand Junction on May 16, 2023. (Chase Woodruff/Colorado Newsline)

The proponents of a planned short-line Utah railroad that would dramatically increase oil-train traffic through Colorado last week filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking a review of litigation that derailed the project late last year.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in August overturned the federal approval of the 88-mile Uinta Basin Railway, which would connect the oil fields of northeastern Utah to the nation’s main rail network, ruling regulatory agencies didn’t properly scrutinize the potential downstream environmental impacts. In November, the court rejected a petition for rehearing, and in January the U.S. Forest Service withdrew its approval for the segment of line crossing the agency’s land.

Now the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition, formed by seven oil-rich counties in the area to fund and facilitate the rail project, is seeking more state money to take its case all the way to the Supreme Court. ... In its March 4 filing, the infrastructure coalition claims the D.C. appeals court decision took too broad a view of the National Environmental Policy Act review required of the rail project, and that the federal regulatory agencies did not have to consider the impacts to Colorado or the Gulf Coast communities where the oil would be refined.

At stake is whether federal regulatory agencies must consider downstream impacts such as potential oil spills, wildfires and carbon emissions contributing to global warming. The coalition cites a 2004 case, Department of Transportation v. Public Citizen, which found an agency’s limited authority might not require it to consider more far-reaching impacts under NEPA.

{snip}

David O. Williams is an award-winning freelance journalist based in EagleVail, Colorado. His work has appeared in more than 75 publications around the world and he owns and operates RealVail.com.