The question
Whether EPA's disapprovals of the Oklahoma and Utah state implementation plans under the Clean Air Act are locally or regionally applicable actions reviewable in a regional Circuit rather than the D.C. Circuit.
Oklahoma v. EPA
What the Court decided
The Court held that EPA's disapprovals of the Oklahoma and Utah state implementation plans are locally or regionally applicable actions, so challenges to them may be brought in a regional Circuit. Each SIP disapproval is its own Clean Air Act action, undertaken under the same authority as a SIP approval, and a SIP disapproval applies only to the State that proposed the plan. EPA's choice to aggregate its disapprovals into one omnibus Federal Register rule does not change the venue analysis, because the statute makes the Act's framing of the relevant action controlling regardless of how EPA packages its decisions.
How the justices split
8-0The Court's opinion
Thomas, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Jackson
Applying the two-step venue framework from EPA v. Calumet Shreveport Refining, the Court identified the relevant EPA action by reference to the Clean Air Act provision under which EPA acted rather than how EPA presented its decision. Each SIP disapproval is its own action taken under the same authority as a SIP approval, which the statute lists as a prototypical locally or regionally applicable action, and applies only to the State that proposed the plan. EPA's aggregation of its disapprovals into one omnibus Federal Register rule has no significance for venue, so the Oklahoma and Utah disapprovals are reviewable in a regional Circuit.
Concurring in the judgment
Gorsuch, joined by Roberts
Gorsuch agreed with the judgment that the disapprovals are reviewable in a regional Circuit but wrote separately rather than joining the opinion of the Court.
How we know · 5 sourced claims
The Court held that EPA's disapprovals of the Oklahoma and Utah SIPs are locally or regionally applicable actions reviewable in a regional Circuit.
Source: syllabus, Held
The Court applied the two-step venue inquiry under Section 7607(b)(1) drawn from EPA v. Calumet Shreveport Refining, L.L.C., 605 U.S. 627.
Source: syllabus, Held
Each EPA SIP disapproval constitutes its own action because EPA undertakes disapprovals under the same Clean Air Act authority underlying SIP approvals.
Source: syllabus, Held
EPA's aggregation of its SIP disapprovals into one omnibus Federal Register rule has no significance for venue purposes.
Source: syllabus, Held
Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Jackson; Gorsuch filed an opinion concurring in the judgment joined by Roberts; Alito took no part.
Source: syllabus, lineup