In a significant victory for environmental advocacy groups, the Supreme Court’s refusal on June 30, 2025 to grant certiorari in two pivotal cases (Port of Tacoma, et al. v. Puget Soundkeeper Alliance and ExxonMobil Corp., et al. v. Environment Texas Citizen Lobby, et al.) is widely expected to embolden and increase the prevalence of citizen suits under federal environmental statutes. The high court’s decision leaves intact lower court rulings that affirm a broad scope for citizen enforcement, reinforcing the role of individuals and organizations as “private attorneys general” in bringing suits against polluters.
The denial of certiorari in these cases sends a clear message: the current legal framework empowering citizens to enforce environmental laws remains robust. Industry petitioners in both cases sought to significantly narrow the reach of citizen suit provisions, particularly concerning standing requirements and the ability to enforce state-issued permits that go beyond federal standards. The Court’s inaction signals a rejection of these attempts to curb environmental watchdog efforts.
Port of Tacoma: Upholding State Permit Enforcement
In Port of Tacoma, et al. v. Puget Soundkeeper Alliance, the petitioners challenged a 9th Circuit ruling that allowed environmental groups to enforce state-issued Clean Water Act (CWA) permits in federal court, even when those permits contained requirements more stringent than federal law. This case centered on alleged violations of Washington State’s Industrial Stormwater General Permit, with Puget Soundkeeper Alliance arguing for accountability for polluted runoff from a wharf.
The Supreme Court’s denial of cert in this instance means the 9th Circuit’s expansive interpretation stands. This outcome is crucial because it allows citizens in circuits aligned with the 9th (and 4th and 11th Circuits) to continue to enforce the full scope of state-issued National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. This is a considerable win for states seeking to implement stricter environmental protections and for citizen groups dedicated to upholding them. It also highlights a continuing circuit split on this issue, as the 2nd Circuit has a narrower view. For now, the broader interpretation prevails in a significant portion of the country.
ExxonMobil: Affirming Broad Standing and Penalties
The ExxonMobil Corp., et al. v. Environment Texas Citizen Lobby, et al. case involved a prolonged battle over air pollution from ExxonMobil’s Baytown, Texas, petrochemical complex. The 5th Circuit had upheld a substantial $14.25 million civil penalty against Exxon, the largest ever in a Clean Air Act (CAA) citizen suit.
ExxonMobil urged the Supreme Court to revisit its 2000 precedent in Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc., which established that civil penalties paid to the government could satisfy Article III of the U.S. Constitution’s “redressability” requirement for citizen plaintiffs. The company also sought to impose a more restrictive standard for demonstrating “traceability” of injuries to specific violations.
By denying cert, the Supreme Court left the 5th Circuit’s decision undisturbed, affirming the broad interpretation of standing for citizen plaintiffs and reiterating that civil penalties can serve as a deterrent and redress injuries in citizen suits.
This outcome is a significant affirmation of the fundamental principles underpinning environmental citizen enforcement, ensuring that groups like Environment Texas and the Sierra Club can continue to pursue accountability for alleged environmental violations and secure substantial penalties that discourage future non-compliance.
The Landscape Ahead: More Citizen Suits Expected
The implications of these denials are clear: environmental groups are poised to leverage these victories to intensify their citizen suit efforts. The CWA and CAA, along with over a dozen other federal environmental statutes, explicitly include citizen suit provisions, recognizing that government enforcement agencies may not always have the resources or the political will to pursue every violation.
As federal enforcement priorities potentially shift, citizen suits are expected to become a more robust backstop, filling any perceived gaps in regulatory oversight. This means regulated entities should anticipate a heightened risk of litigation from environmental organizations, underscoring the critical importance of robust environmental compliance programs. The ability of citizens to seek both injunctive relief and significant civil penalties payable to the U.S. Treasury provides a powerful incentive for companies to adhere to environmental regulations.
In essence, the Supreme Court’s recent order list has reinforced the power of the public in environmental protection, solidifying the legal avenues for citizens to act as guardians of the nation’s air and water. This decision ensures that citizen suits will continue to be a formidable force in environmental litigation for the foreseeable future.
What This Means for Industry
- Increased Legal Risk: Industries should anticipate a rise in citizen-led litigation, particularly from well-organized advocacy groups capable of using regulatory data and compliance reports to build strong cases.
- Compliance Pressure: Regulatory compliance will no longer be a shield only scrutinized by the government. Any violation, even minor or self-reported, may trigger a lawsuit from a citizen group.
- Litigation Costs: Even unsuccessful suits can entail significant legal costs and reputational damage. For example, ExxonMobil’s litigation spanned over a decade, involving appeals and millions in legal fees.
How Companies Can Protect Themselves
To mitigate this new landscape of liability, companies—especially those operating in manufacturing, energy, and logistics—should consult with counsel and consider adopt proactive risk management strategies:
1. Robust Compliance Systems
Implement and document environmental controls in real time. Third-party audits may help verify compliance with discharge, emissions, and permit conditions.
2. Transparency and Community Engagement
Foster open communication with local communities and environmental groups. Transparency can reduce adversarial relationships and build trust.
3. Rapid Incident Response
Ensure that any environmental release, even if minor, is addressed immediately and logged properly. Self-correction and voluntary reporting may reduce the likelihood of a lawsuit.
4. Legal Risk Assessments
Consider conducting periodic assessments to identify areas where past or current practices may be vulnerable to citizen suits, and remediate proactively.
Looking Ahead
The Supreme Court’s June 30 decision sends a clear signal: Citizen suits are here to stay—and may even be growing in power and frequency. While this strengthens environmental accountability, it also places added pressure on industries to go beyond minimum legal compliance and embrace more holistic environmental governance practices.
As the regulatory landscape evolves, businesses must prepare not only to meet federal standards but also to defend their records in the court of public and legal opinion.
