The Hardest Day so Far: NEPA
Overall, I attempt to navigate the intricate web of daily politics and the actions of the current administration with greater care, directing my focus toward their implications within environmental law—the subject I teach. This approach serves not merely as a means of avoidance but as a deliberate strategy designed to afford students the opportunity to develop their own critical thinking abilities and reach their own conclusions, rather than imposing my personal political beliefs upon them.
The "divisive concepts" law in Tennessee further complicates this discourse by prohibiting discussions on certain sensitive subjects within higher education. While its primary aim appears to stifle conversations surrounding race and sex—largely stemming from the contentious narrative around Critical Race Theory—I remain acutely aware of how environmental justice fits into this framework. Furthermore, the law's ominous threat of censorship regarding any calls for "the violent overthrow of the United States government" compels me to reflect on the potential repercussions of even mild critiques of the current administration.
Thus, I tread carefully through this challenging landscape by framing my remarks on recent administrative actions strictly in terms of their consequences for the practice of environmental law. I consciously withhold my value judgments, allowing students the autonomy to investigate, analyze, and engage with the material on their own terms. After all, cultivating independent thought is among the most significant achievements we can celebrate within the educational environment, is it not?
On the day I taught NEPA, it was profoundly challenging to withhold my own thoughts, feelings, and opinions. For over 50 years, NEPA has been a cornerstone of environmental policy, influencing global standards. The erosion of its protections permits significant infrastructure and energy projects to advance devoid of essential public oversight and environmental safeguards. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued an interim final rule that, in my solemn view, contravenes the Administrative Procedures Act, thus dismantling five decades of NEPA law. CEQ eradicated all regulations established under NEPA—regulations that have been vital in dictating when agencies are required to conduct environmental reviews and necessitating public notice and comment periods for Environmental Impact Statements.
The White House Council on Environmental Quality relinquished its rulemaking authority and rescinded these crucial regulations, effective April 11, 2025. This tectonic shift in policy opens up a disturbing realm for developers, while simultaneously threatening communities and ecosystems. An indifferent approach to environmental review may present a seemingly attractive opportunity for development, but it brazenly risks the very foundations upon which our communities and natural environments stand.
As we contemplate this unsettling reality, our challenge extends beyond merely comprehending NEPA’s intricacies. It is imperative that we galvanize others to advocate for its restoration. We must remain vigilant and ensure that environmental impact statements evolve from mere formalities to active dialogues within our communities. The stakes are high, and in this struggle, we must rise to the occasion and defend the legal frameworks that safeguard our environment for generations to come.
On the surface, this initiative appears to focus on streamlining the federal permitting and environmental review process for energy and infrastructure projects. Additional measures aimed at this objective include granting agency leaders the authority to invoke emergency provisions to hasten the permitting process, as well as the removal of methodologies deemed "arbitrary or ideologically motivated" by the government, which are considered to exceed the established requirements for environmental considerations. However, beneath this façade lies a more concerning reality: the erosion of environmental protections and the resulting exposure of public lands to exploitation, effectively advancing Trump's agenda of "drill, baby, drill."
This final rule not only eliminates essential mechanisms for public engagement, but it also introduces greater disorder and uncertainty, impeding NEPA procedures and halting projects as key stakeholders strive to navigate the new landscape. I consulted my Environmental Law professor on how to approach NEPA instruction in light of this considerable setback, as there are discussions regarding a potential repeal of the law in its entirety. He observed that there is no definitive approach to this dilemma, citing the confusion faced by educators across the nation in adapting to these extraordinary circumstances.
Ultimately, I focused on conveying the history and evolution of the law, ensuring that students grasp its foundational significance amidst the turmoil. I asked the students to share their thoughts and feelings, and they voiced anxiety and despair at the state of the law in the field many of them are supposed to enter as scientists. It was the hardest class for me personally, and usually I try to incorporate hope and optimism into my lessons, but I could not find any here.
