Supreme Court hears dispute over whether bundled EPA disapprovals of state plans belong in DC or regional courts

The Supreme Court heard argument in Oklahoma v. Environmental Protection Agency about whether EPA’s bundled disapprovals of state implementation plans must be reviewed in the D.C. Circuit or in regional circuits where the states are located.

Oklahoma’s lawyer, Mansingh Hani, argued that “EPA actions to approve or disapprove state implementation plans are the prototypical action reviewed in the regional circuit,” and that the Clean Air Act’s venue provision directs courts to the statutory authority under which EPA acted rather than to the form of publication. Hani asked the Court to reverse the decision below and remand the case to the Tenth Circuit.

Why it matters: the Court’s decision will determine whether challenges to state-specific Clean Air Act decisions are litigated locally — where states and local facts are central — or centralized in the D.C. Circuit when EPA publishes a single Federal Register notice covering multiple states. That choice affects how uniformly national standards are reviewed, how litigants allocate briefing and resources, and whether consolidated national review could supplant regionally focused adjudication.

Counsel for EPA, Mr. Stewart, defended the agency’s position that some bundled actions may be funneled to the…