Oklahoma v. Environmental Protection Agency

Justia · Docket · oyez.org

Argued on Mar 25, 2025.

Petitioner: Oklahoma, et al.
Respondent: Environmental Protection Agency, et al.

Advocates:

Mithun Mansinghani (for the Petitioners in No. 23-1067)
Misha Tseytlin (for the Petitioners in No. 23-1068)
Malcolm L. Stewart (for the Respondents)

Facts of the case (from oyez.org)

In 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) strengthened its national air quality standards for ozone, requiring states to submit implementation plans that would prevent their emissions from significantly impacting other states’ air quality. In February 2023, the EPA issued a final rule disapproving the plans submitted by 21 states, including Oklahoma and Utah, after evaluating them using a four-step framework designed to address interstate pollution. Oklahoma and Utah, along with various industry groups, challenged the EPA’s disapproval of their plans in their respective regional circuit courts. The EPA responded by moving to transfer these cases to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, arguing that because the disapprovals were published together in a single Federal Register notice and used a consistent analytical approach, they must be reviewed by the D.C. Circuit rather than regional courts.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit agreed with the EPA that the challenged rule is nationally applicable, so it granted the EPA’s motions to transfer the petitions to the D.C. Circuit.

Question

Does the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia have exclusive jurisdiction to review an Environmental Protection Agency action that affects only one state or region, simply because the EPA published that action alongside actions affecting other states in a single Federal Register notice?

[23-1067] Oklahoma v. Environmental Protection Agency

Supreme Court Oral Arguments